SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. SEKOLAH ANTARABANGSA TUN DR. ISMAIL SDN. BHD. 2. MOHAMED TAWFIK BIN TUN DR. ISMAIL 3. RUBINA BINTI MUSTAFA KEMAL

SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. SEKOLAH ANTARABANGSA TUN DR. ISMAIL SDN. BHD. 2. MOHAMED TAWFIK BIN TUN DR. ISMAIL 3. RUBINA BINTI MUSTAFA KEMAL

The appeal was dismissed because the application to set aside was filed outside the mandatory 30‑day period without satisfactory explanation, the JID was regularly entered (service and costs valid) and the defendants failed to demonstrate any prima facie defence meriting a trial.

Citation
WA-22NCC-450-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Small Medium Enterprise Development Bank Malaysia Berhad; First Defendant: Sekolah Antarabangsa Tun Dr. Ismail Sdn. Bhd.; Second Defendant: Mohamed Tawfik bin Tun Dr. Ismail; Third Defendant: Rubina binti Mustafa Kemal
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 October 2019
Case Number
WA-22NCC-450-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial (debt/guarantee) / Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Judgment in Default of Appearance Before a Judge in Chambers
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the senior assistant registrar affirmed
Legal Topics
Judgment in Default (jid), Service of Process, Setting Aside Judgment, Guarantee and Indemnity, Limitation Act 1953, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Banking and Finance Limitation Law Judgment in Default (jid) Service of Process Setting Aside Judgment Guarantee and Indemnity +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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Small Medium Enterprise Development Bank Malaysia Berhad

Plaintiff

Sekolah Antarabangsa Tun Dr. Ismail Sdn. Bhd.

First Defendant

Mohamed Tawfik bin Tun Dr. Ismail

Second Defendant

Rubina binti Mustafa Kemal

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial (debt/guarantee) / Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Judgment in Default of Appearance Before a Judge in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether application to set aside JID complied with O.42 r.13 time limit
  2. 2 Whether JID was regular (service, costs, amendment)
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff had locus/standing after corporate vesting/name changes

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the application to set aside was filed outside the mandatory 30‑day period without satisfactory explanation, the JID was regularly entered (service and costs valid) and the defendants failed to demonstrate any prima facie defence meriting a trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the senior assistant registrar affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs