BLUE SEAL (M) SDN BHD A ONE PILING SDN BHD & SATU LAGI

BLUE SEAL (M) SDN BHD A ONE PILING SDN BHD & SATU LAGI

The amended counterclaim sufficiently pleaded material facts and reliefs to give fair notice; deficiencies alleged by the appellant were matters of form or evidence to be tested at trial and did not amount to an abuse of process or an obvious unsustainable claim warranting summary striking out; therefore the appeal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-12A-6-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Blue Seal (M) Sdn Bhd; First Respondent/first Defendant: A One Piling Sdn Bhd; Second Respondent/second Defendant: True Pro Consult Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 June 2021
Case Number
WA-12A-6-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (interlocutory) / Appeal From Sessions Court to High Court (re Hearing De Novo)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Striking Out, Abuse of Process, Pleadings, Lifting Corporate Veil, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Negligence, Inducement of Breach of Contract, Declaratory Relief
Civil Procedure Construction Law Company Law Tort Law Striking Out Abuse of Process Pleadings Lifting Corporate Veil +4 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blue Seal (M) Sdn Bhd

Appellant/plaintiff

A One Piling Sdn Bhd

First Respondent/first Defendant

True Pro Consult Sdn Bhd

Second Respondent/second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (interlocutory) / Appeal From Sessions Court to High Court (re Hearing De Novo)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents' amended counterclaim should be struck out under O.18 r.19 as an abuse of process or for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' pleadings were deficient for failing to plead particulars/elements of torts (deceit, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligence, inducement)
  3. 3 Whether inconsistent pleadings (contract and tort) or prayers for declaratory relief justify striking out

Ratio Decidendi

The amended counterclaim sufficiently pleaded material facts and reliefs to give fair notice; deficiencies alleged by the appellant were matters of form or evidence to be tested at trial and did not amount to an abuse of process or an obvious unsustainable claim warranting summary striking out; therefore the appeal is dismissed and the counterclaim remains on the record.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs RM5,000.00 subject to the usual allocator
  • Respondents' amended counterclaim not struck out