1. ) TAN CHOON SOON 2. ) TAN CHOON HOCK 1. ) MOHD AZHAR BIN MUSA 2. ) TEO WOON NE (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 3. ) WONG KIAN CHUNG (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 4.

1. ) TAN CHOON SOON 2. ) TAN CHOON HOCK 1. ) MOHD AZHAR BIN MUSA 2. ) TEO WOON NE (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 3. ) WONG KIAN CHUNG (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 4.

Court held it had jurisdiction to hear the application under Order 14 despite remedies overlapping with Order 81 by applying Order 1A (interest of justice); on the affidavits the deposit payment of RM4.4 million was undisputed and defendants had not satisfied the condition precedent nor obtained requisite approvals before plaintiffs terminated; defendants' asserted COVID-19 delays and steps taken did not create triable issues sufficient to defeat summary judgment; accordingly permission was granted for plaintiffs to enter final judgment against the defendants to recover the deposit and related declaratory relief.

Citation
CB-22NCvC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Tan Choon Soon; Plaintiff: Tan Choon Hock; Defendant: Mohd Azhar bin Musa; Defendant: Teo Woon Ne; Defendant: Wong Kian Chung; Defendant: Kartini binti Abdul Rahman
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 June 2022
Case Number
CB-22NCvC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract Dispute Summary Judgment Application / Application Decided (order 14 Summary Judgment)
Outcome
Application for summary judgment allowed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Specific Performance, Rescission, Deposit Recovery, Condition Precedent, Time Is of the Essence, Procedural Compliance
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Specific Performance Rescission Deposit Recovery Condition Precedent Time Is of the Essence +1 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Choon Soon

Plaintiff

Tan Choon Hock

Plaintiff

Mohd Azhar bin Musa

Defendant

Teo Woon Ne

Defendant

Wong Kian Chung

Defendant

Kartini binti Abdul Rahman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract Dispute Summary Judgment Application / Application Decided (order 14 Summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff may seek summary judgment under Order 14 when remedies sought overlap with Order 81
  2. 2 Whether defendants breached clause 3.4 (failure to satisfy condition precedent) and whether time was of the essence
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs' payment of deposit waived or extinguished defendants' obligation to meet conditions precedent

Ratio Decidendi

Court held it had jurisdiction to hear the application under Order 14 despite remedies overlapping with Order 81 by applying Order 1A (interest of justice); on the affidavits the deposit payment of RM4.4 million was undisputed and defendants had not satisfied the condition precedent nor obtained requisite approvals before plaintiffs terminated; defendants' asserted COVID-19 delays and steps taken did not create triable issues sufficient to defeat summary judgment; accordingly permission was granted for plaintiffs to enter final judgment against the defendants to recover the deposit and related declaratory relief.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment allowed

Orders

  • Permission granted to Plaintiffs to enter final judgment against Defendants under Order 14
  • Declaration that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover the deposit amounting to RM4,400,000.00 and related relief as sought in the application