YAYASAN PELAJARAN MARA NU-SECURE NET - 360 SDN. BHD. (NO. SYARIKAT : 762567-h)

YAYASAN PELAJARAN MARA NU-SECURE NET - 360 SDN. BHD. (NO. SYARIKAT : 762567-h)

There were no triable issues with merit because the documentary record and affidavits showed defendants admitted receipt of the advance, failed to deliver equipment for Phase 1 (which used existing labs), meetings established that any undelivered items would be quantified and the balance returned, and termination was valid; accordingly Order 14 summary judgment was properly granted and plaintiff was entitled to repayment of RM1,285,162.72.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-209-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: NU-SECURE NET – 360 SDN. BHD.; Respondent/plaintiff: YAYASAN PELAJARAN MARA
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 November 2019
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-209-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court / Appeal Against High Court Summary Judgment Under Order 14
Outcome
High Court allowed plaintiff's Order 14 application; judgment entered for plaintiff to recover unperformed portion of advance
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Advance Payment, Breach of Contract, Termination, Refund of Deposit, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Commercial Law Remedies Summary Judgment Advance Payment Breach of Contract Termination +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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NU-SECURE NET – 360 SDN. BHD.

Appellant/defendant

YAYASAN PELAJARAN MARA

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court / Appeal Against High Court Summary Judgment Under Order 14

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant raised triable issues sufficient to defeat an Order 14 summary judgment application
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff entitled to repayment of RM1,285,162.72 as unperformed portion of advance payment
  3. 3 Whether termination by plaintiff was valid and lawful

Ratio Decidendi

There were no triable issues with merit because the documentary record and affidavits showed defendants admitted receipt of the advance, failed to deliver equipment for Phase 1 (which used existing labs), meetings established that any undelivered items would be quantified and the balance returned, and termination was valid; accordingly Order 14 summary judgment was properly granted and plaintiff was entitled to repayment of RM1,285,162.72.

Court Disposition

High Court allowed plaintiff's Order 14 application; judgment entered for plaintiff to recover unperformed portion of advance

Orders

  • Defendant to pay RM1,285,162.72 to Plaintiff as refund of unperformed portion of advance payment
  • Costs awarded to Plaintiff in the sum of RM2,000 subject to allocatur