Sinar Teknik Urus Harta Sdn Bhd 1. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KEWANGAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Datuk Seri Dr. Haji Dzulkefly Ahmad (Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia) 4. ) Dato' Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini Bin Ujang 5. ) Dato' Seri Anwar Bin I

Sinar Teknik Urus Harta Sdn Bhd 1. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KEWANGAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Datuk Seri Dr. Haji Dzulkefly Ahmad (Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia) 4. ) Dato' Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini Bin Ujang 5. ) Dato' Seri Anwar Bin I

Claim struck out because Plaintif failed to establish formation of a binding contract: no award letter was communicated to Plaintif, the documents relied upon were internal and one was cancelled, D1/D2 are not proper suable entities, and the claim seeks remedies (including injunctions) that are constrained by statutory limits; therefore the pleadings disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous/vexatious and an abuse of process.

Citation
WA-21NCvC-29-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintif: Sinar Teknik Urus Harta Sdn. Bhd.; Defendan: Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia; Defendan: Kementerian Kewangan Malaysia; Defendan: Datuk Seri Dr. Hj. Dzulkefly Ahmad (Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia); Defendan: Dato' Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini bin Ujang; Defendan: Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim (Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan Menteri Kewangan Malaysia); Defendan: Datuk Seri Amir Hamzah Azizan (Menteri Kewangan Malaysia II); Defendan: YB Senator Tengku Datuk Seri Utama Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz; Defendan: Dato' Wan Murtadza Wan Mahmud; Defendan: Mohd Fauzee bin Abd. Majid; Defendan: Muhammad Kamil bin Abdul Munim; Defendan: Datuk Johan Mahmood Merican; Defendan: Dato' Indera Ab Rahim bin Ab Rahman; Defendan: Mohd Hazizi bin Harun
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 March 2025
Case Number
WA-21NCvC-29-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Guaman Sivil (civil Suit) / Application to Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19(1)(b) or (d) Kaedah‑kaedah Mahkamah 2012 (pre Trial)
Outcome
Lampiran 10 dibenarkan dengan kos. Writ Saman dan Penyataan Tuntutan Plaintif telah dibatalkan.
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Contract Formation, Tender Award, Injunctions Against Government, Abuse of Process, Suitability of Parties
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Procurement/tender Law Strike Out Contract Formation Tender Award Injunctions Against Government +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sinar Teknik Urus Harta Sdn. Bhd.

Plaintif

Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia

Defendan

Kementerian Kewangan Malaysia

Defendan

Datuk Seri Dr. Hj. Dzulkefly Ahmad (Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia)

Defendan

Dato' Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini bin Ujang

Defendan

Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim (Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan Menteri Kewangan Malaysia)

Defendan

Datuk Seri Amir Hamzah Azizan (Menteri Kewangan Malaysia II)

Defendan

YB Senator Tengku Datuk Seri Utama Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz

Defendan

Dato' Wan Murtadza Wan Mahmud

Defendan

Mohd Fauzee bin Abd. Majid

Defendan

Muhammad Kamil bin Abdul Munim

Defendan

Datuk Johan Mahmood Merican

Defendan

Dato' Indera Ab Rahim bin Ab Rahman

Defendan

Mohd Hazizi bin Harun

Defendan

Procedural Posture

Guaman Sivil (civil Suit) / Application to Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19(1)(b) or (d) Kaedah‑kaedah Mahkamah 2012 (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a valid contract was formed between Plaintif and the government parties
  2. 2 Whether the alleged award letter of 20.9.2022 existed and was communicated to the Plaintif
  3. 3 Whether Defendan First (D1) and Defendan Second (D2) are proper legal entities that can be sued

Ratio Decidendi

Claim struck out because Plaintif failed to establish formation of a binding contract: no award letter was communicated to Plaintif, the documents relied upon were internal and one was cancelled, D1/D2 are not proper suable entities, and the claim seeks remedies (including injunctions) that are constrained by statutory limits; therefore the pleadings disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous/vexatious and an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Lampiran 10 dibenarkan dengan kos. Writ Saman dan Penyataan Tuntutan Plaintif telah dibatalkan.

Orders

  • Application (Lampiran 10) allowed with costs
  • Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim struck out and plaintiff's action dismissed