TOPLAND TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED MICROTRONICS TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD

TOPLAND TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED MICROTRONICS TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD

Affidavits sworn before Malaysian consular officers abroad and filed in English were admissible; omission of residential address in commercial affidavit was acceptable or curable; section 90A did not bar reliance on contemporaneous computer-generated DHL documents at interlocutory summary judgment stage; contemporaneous documents (POs, invoices, DHL receipts, proof of delivery and emails) established that goods were sold and delivered and the Defendant was indebted, except for invoice TP6355 where allegations of theft, fraud and conspiracy raised triable issues — summary judgment granted in part for USD385,492.85 (RM1,629,092.78).

Citation
JA-22NCVC-54-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Topland Technologies Limited; Defendant: Microtronics Technology Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 October 2020
Case Number
JA-22NCVC-54-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit Goods Sold and Delivered / Summary Judgment Application (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application for summary judgment allowed in part and preliminary objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Goods Sold and Delivered, Proof of Delivery, Admissibility of Foreign Affidavits, Computer Generated Evidence (s90 A), Allegation of Fraud and Conspiracy
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Evidence Law Commercial Law Summary Judgment Goods Sold and Delivered Proof of Delivery Admissibility of Foreign Affidavits +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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Topland Technologies Limited

Plaintiff

Microtronics Technology Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit Goods Sold and Delivered / Summary Judgment Application (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether affidavits affirmed before Malaysian consular officers abroad require verification
  2. 2 Whether translation into Bahasa Malaysia was required
  3. 3 Whether deponent's residential address omission invalidates affidavits

Ratio Decidendi

Affidavits sworn before Malaysian consular officers abroad and filed in English were admissible; omission of residential address in commercial affidavit was acceptable or curable; section 90A did not bar reliance on contemporaneous computer-generated DHL documents at interlocutory summary judgment stage; contemporaneous documents (POs, invoices, DHL receipts, proof of delivery and emails) established that goods were sold and delivered and the Defendant was indebted, except for invoice TP6355 where allegations of theft, fraud and conspiracy raised triable issues — summary judgment granted in part for USD385,492.85 (RM1,629,092.78).

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment allowed in part and preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • Preliminary objection by Defendant dismissed
  • Summary judgment refused in respect of invoice TP6355 for USD160,000 due to triable issues of theft/conspiracy/fraud