Sunsets Fortune Sdn Bhd Special Coral Sdn Bhd

Sunsets Fortune Sdn Bhd Special Coral Sdn Bhd

Summary judgment was inappropriate because the defendant raised an arguable and triable issue as to the legal effect of the notice of relocation: the relocation clause (Clause 17.2) could have produced a substitution of premises if the tenant did not reject within 14 days, requiring the landlord to offer a new tenancy; the landlord did not follow the substitution process but issued a termination, creating an inconsistency that must be resolved at trial. Other defenses (prematurity of writ; fixed-term status) were found unarguable, but the relocation issue alone sufficed to overturn summary judgment.

Citation
PA-12ANCvC-38-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Sunsets Fortune Sdn Bhd; Respondent/plaintiff: Special Coral Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 November 2021
Case Number
PA-12ANCvC-38-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal — Summary Judgment / High Court Appeal From Sessions Court Decision on Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of the Sessions Court dated 21.4.2021 set aside; summary judgment refused and matter remitted for trial
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Termination of Tenancy, Relocation Clause, Damages for Unexpired Term, Notice of Relocation, COVID 19 Business Closure
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Landlord and Tenant Law Commercial Law Summary Judgment Termination of Tenancy Relocation Clause Damages for Unexpired Term +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunsets Fortune Sdn Bhd

Appellant/defendant

Special Coral Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal — Summary Judgment / High Court Appeal From Sessions Court Decision on Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ/claim was premature because restoration was due after the writ was filed
  2. 2 Whether the Fourth Memorandum of Renewal is a fixed term contract and whether damages for the unexpired term are claimable
  3. 3 Whether the notice of relocation produced a substitution of premises and hence whether the subsequent notice of termination was valid

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was inappropriate because the defendant raised an arguable and triable issue as to the legal effect of the notice of relocation: the relocation clause (Clause 17.2) could have produced a substitution of premises if the tenant did not reject within 14 days, requiring the landlord to offer a new tenancy; the landlord did not follow the substitution process but issued a termination, creating an inconsistency that must be resolved at trial. Other defenses (prematurity of writ; fixed-term status) were found unarguable, but the relocation issue alone sufficed to overturn summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of the Sessions Court dated 21.4.2021 set aside; summary judgment refused and matter remitted for trial

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Order of the Sessions Court dated 21.4.2021 set aside