TAI LEE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 437543-A) CHEN FUN SING @ CHEONG FUN SING

TAI LEE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 437543-A) CHEN FUN SING @ CHEONG FUN SING

The SPA was not concluded because the Defendant did not sign or communicate acceptance and the purported consideration (cheque for RM171,452) was not cashed or delivered as value; therefore no enforceable contract existed and the writ had no reasonable cause of action and amounted to an abuse of process, warranting striking out under Order 18 r 19.

Citation
JB-22NCVC-20-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: TAI LEE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD; Defendant: CHEN FUN SING @ CHEONG FUN SING
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 November 2021
Case Number
JB-22NCVC-20-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit Contract (specific Performance) / Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R 19 Rules of Court 2012
Outcome
Application allowed; Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Offer and Acceptance, Consideration, Striking Out Pleadings, Order 18 Rule 19 ROC
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Specific Performance Offer and Acceptance Consideration Striking Out Pleadings Order 18 Rule 19 ROC

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TAI LEE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

Plaintiff

CHEN FUN SING @ CHEONG FUN SING

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit Contract (specific Performance) / Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R 19 Rules of Court 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) was concluded
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff has a reasonable cause of action
  3. 3 Whether the writ action is an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The SPA was not concluded because the Defendant did not sign or communicate acceptance and the purported consideration (cheque for RM171,452) was not cashed or delivered as value; therefore no enforceable contract existed and the writ had no reasonable cause of action and amounted to an abuse of process, warranting striking out under Order 18 r 19.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim struck out

Orders

  • Strike out the Writ of Summons and the Statement of Claim pursuant to Order 18 r 19 Rules of Court 2012
  • Costs awarded to the Defendant