INTAN PERMATA PROPERTIES SDN BHD AEJB ENGINEERING (M) SDN BHD

INTAN PERMATA PROPERTIES SDN BHD AEJB ENGINEERING (M) SDN BHD

The Court held the Letter of Acceptance and subsequent Appellant instruction and Engineer's Instruction created a binding arrangement and sufficient privity between Appellant and Respondent for the variation works; unsigned PAM sub-contract/standard PAM documents could not be relied on to impose conditions precedent; the Respondent satisfied the threshold for summary judgment and the Appellant failed to show a triable defence; consequently the summary judgment and dismissal of the striking out application were upheld and recall applications dismissed as the court was functus officio.

Citation
WA-12ANCVC-93-04/2018 & WA-12ANCVC-94-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Intan Permata Properties Sdn Bhd; Respondent/plaintiff: AEJB Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd; Main Contractor/defendant/appellant: MasCapital Construction Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 November 2018
Case Number
WA-12ANCVC-93-04/2018 & WA-12ANCVC-94-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal and Related Civil Suit (summary Judgment and Striking Out) / Judgment (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; summary judgment affirmed; striking out application dismissed; recall/review applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Privity of Contract, Summary Judgment (order 14), Striking Out Pleadings (order 18), Variation Orders, Certificate of Making Good Defects (cmgd), Quantum Meruit/unjust Enrichment, Limitation (not Pursued)
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Construction Law Civil Procedure Privity of Contract Summary Judgment (order 14) Striking Out Pleadings (order 18) Variation Orders Certificate of Making Good Defects (cmgd) +2 more

Case Brief

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intan Permata Properties Sdn Bhd

Appellant/defendant

AEJB Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

MasCapital Construction Sdn Bhd

Main Contractor/defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal and Related Civil Suit (summary Judgment and Striking Out) / Judgment (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was privity of contract between the Respondent and the Appellant notwithstanding existence of a nominated sub-contract arrangement with MasCapital
  2. 2 Whether the Statement of Claim was defective for failing to plead full terms of the PAM contractual documents
  3. 3 Whether unsigned PAM Sub-Contract/Agreement could be relied on to invoke conditions precedent such as issuance of CMGD

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the Letter of Acceptance and subsequent Appellant instruction and Engineer's Instruction created a binding arrangement and sufficient privity between Appellant and Respondent for the variation works; unsigned PAM sub-contract/standard PAM documents could not be relied on to impose conditions precedent; the Respondent satisfied the threshold for summary judgment and the Appellant failed to show a triable defence; consequently the summary judgment and dismissal of the striking out application were upheld and recall applications dismissed as the court was functus officio.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; summary judgment affirmed; striking out application dismissed; recall/review applications dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the Respondent confirmed for net payable RM140,005.00
  • Appeals WA-12ANCVC-93-04/2018, WA-12ANCVC-94-04/2018 and WA-12ANCVC-95-04/2018 dismissed