IMPIAN MURNI RESOURCES SDN BHD KHENG BEE CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

IMPIAN MURNI RESOURCES SDN BHD KHENG BEE CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

The court held that Clauses 2.1 and 2.2 allowed the work programme to be revised due to site conditions and concurrent subcontractor activity; Plaintiff was therefore not in delay and the six-month completion period was effectively extended. Defendant failed to prove the proper quantum and entitlement to set-off for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
DA-22NCvC-37-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintif; Defendant: Defendan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 July 2023
Case Number
DA-22NCvC-37-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Construction Contract Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's interim payment claim allowed; Defendant's counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Site Conditions, Interim Payment, Set Off, Breach of Contract, Costs, Interest
Construction Law Contract Law Commercial Litigation Extension of Time Site Conditions Interim Payment Set Off Breach of Contract +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintif

Plaintiff

Defendan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Construction Contract Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff was in delay in completing the works
  2. 2 Whether site conditions and concurrent subcontractors (including flooding) entitled Plaintiff to extension under contractual clauses
  3. 3 Whether Defendant validly set-off amounts for building materials supplied on site against Plaintiff's interim payment claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Clauses 2.1 and 2.2 allowed the work programme to be revised due to site conditions and concurrent subcontractor activity; Plaintiff was therefore not in delay and the six-month completion period was effectively extended. Defendant failed to prove the proper quantum and entitlement to set-off for materials on site and ignored the effect of flooding and the stop-work instruction. Accordingly Plaintiff’s interim payment claim of RM1,288,643.35 is allowed and Defendant’s counterclaim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's interim payment claim allowed; Defendant's counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Plaintiff RM1,288,643.35 (Prayer 15(a))
  • Interest at 5% per annum on the judgment sum from date of judgment until full payment