YES TRAVEL & HOLIDAYS SDN. BHD. 1. ) MIKI TRAVEL (HONG KONG) LIMITED 2. ) MIKI TRAVEL SDN BHD

YES TRAVEL & HOLIDAYS SDN. BHD. 1. ) MIKI TRAVEL (HONG KONG) LIMITED 2. ) MIKI TRAVEL SDN BHD

The appeal is dismissed because the CBA’s arbitration clause governs the dispute; the Paris Tour Quotation did not displace the CBA as it contained no operative terms to do so and functioned as a performance-level document under the CBA; the stay properly extends to the 2nd Defendant because the conspiracy/tort...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-12ANCC-88-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: YES TRAVEL & HOLIDAYS SDN. BHD. (Company No.: 837781-A); 1st Respondent/defendant: MIKI TRAVEL (HONG KONG) LIMITED (License No.: 353363); 2nd Respondent/defendant: MIKI TRAVEL SDN. BHD. (Company No.: 539639-T)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 October 2025
Case Number
WA-12ANCC-88-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (commercial Division) / Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment Staying Proceedings Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court order staying proceedings pending arbitration affirmed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Arbitration Clause, Incorporation by Reference, Non Party Stay, Forum Selection, Avoidance of Multiplicity of Proceedings
Arbitration Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Tort (conspiracy) Stay of Proceedings Arbitration Clause Incorporation by Reference Non Party Stay +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YES TRAVEL & HOLIDAYS SDN. BHD. (Company No.: 837781-A)

Appellant/plaintiff

MIKI TRAVEL (HONG KONG) LIMITED (License No.: 353363)

1st Respondent/defendant

MIKI TRAVEL SDN. BHD. (Company No.: 539639-T)

2nd Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (commercial Division) / Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment Staying Proceedings Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dispute is governed by the arbitration clause in the Core Business Agreement (CBA)
  2. 2 Whether the Paris Tour quotation is a stand-alone contract or subsumed by the CBA
  3. 3 Whether the stay of proceedings should extend to the 2nd Defendant (non-party to the CBA) given allegations of conspiracy

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the CBA’s arbitration clause governs the dispute; the Paris Tour Quotation did not displace the CBA as it contained no operative terms to do so and functioned as a performance-level document under the CBA; the stay properly extends to the 2nd Defendant because the conspiracy/tort allegations are derivative of the same factual matrix and staying avoids multiplicity and inconsistent findings, giving full effect to the arbitration agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court order staying proceedings pending arbitration affirmed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Orders of the Sessions Court dated 11 June 2024 staying all proceedings pending reference to arbitration affirmed