DINERS CLUB (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD. GARY LOH CHI-MING

DINERS CLUB (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD. GARY LOH CHI-MING

Where the parties' contract created a running account and expressly made outstanding sums payable upon demand, the cause of action for the outstanding balance accrues upon a valid demand; therefore the magistrate was wrong to treat 31 December 2009 as the accrual date and the High Court correctly held the cause of action accrued on the solicitor's demand of 6 September 2018, rendering the claim within the limitation period and not amenable to summary striking out under Order 18 Rule 19.

Citation
11ANCC-26-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Diners Club (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. (Company No. 3908-K); Respondent/defendant: Gary Loh Chi-Ming (IC/Passport No. 740821-08-5827 / A2862216)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 September 2021
Case Number
11ANCC-26-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Magistrate's Court (debt/contract) / Appeal to High Court (commercial Division) Against Striking Out Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Running Account, Statute of Limitations, Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19, Accrual of Cause of Action, Demand Requirement
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Limitation Law Commercial Law Running Account Statute of Limitations Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 Accrual of Cause of Action +1 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diners Club (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. (Company No. 3908-K)

Appellant/plaintiff

Gary Loh Chi-Ming (IC/Passport No. 740821-08-5827 / A2862216)

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Magistrate's Court (debt/contract) / Appeal to High Court (commercial Division) Against Striking Out Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim is barred by limitation
  2. 2 Whether the transactions constituted a running account and when the cause of action accrued
  3. 3 Whether striking out under Order 18 Rule 19 was appropriate given the facts and law

Ratio Decidendi

Where the parties' contract created a running account and expressly made outstanding sums payable upon demand, the cause of action for the outstanding balance accrues upon a valid demand; therefore the magistrate was wrong to treat 31 December 2009 as the accrual date and the High Court correctly held the cause of action accrued on the solicitor's demand of 6 September 2018, rendering the claim within the limitation period and not amenable to summary striking out under Order 18 Rule 19.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Magistrate dated 27 April 2021 striking out the plaintiff's claim set aside
  • Plaintiff's claim reinstated (proceedings to continue)