IB BUILDER SDN. BHD. 1. ) TETUAN TEO & CHEW (DISAMAN SEBAGAI FIRMA) 2. ) UNG ENG HUAT (NO. K/P : 66113-03-5263) 3. ) MISI ARMADA SDN. BHD. (NO. SYARIKAT : 1104112-M) 4. ) SALLEH BIN IDRIS (NO. K/P : 780726-04-5057) 5. ) NURUL ASMAT BINTI CH

IB BUILDER SDN. BHD. 1. ) TETUAN TEO & CHEW (DISAMAN SEBAGAI FIRMA) 2. ) UNG ENG HUAT (NO. K/P : 66113-03-5263) 3. ) MISI ARMADA SDN. BHD. (NO. SYARIKAT : 1104112-M) 4. ) SALLEH BIN IDRIS (NO. K/P : 780726-04-5057) 5. ) NURUL ASMAT BINTI CH

The transfer application was allowed because the closest and most real connection to the cause of action is Kota Bharu: the Development Agreement and prior related litigation originated and were adjudicated there, the defendants reside and carry on business there, and material payments and events occurred in Kota Bharu; exercising the court's discretion under Order 57 r.1(4) to transfer to the High Court Kota Bharu was therefore appropriate and just.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-841-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: IB BUILBER SDN BHD; Respondent/defendant 1: TETUAN TEO & CHEW; Respondent/defendant 2: UNG ENG HUAT; Respondent/defendant 3: MISI ARMADA SDN BHD; Respondent/defendant 4: SALLEH BIN IDRIS; Respondent/defendant 5: NURUL ASMAT BINTI CHE AYUB
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 March 2020
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-841-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal Against High Court Order (transfer of Venue)
Outcome
Application to transfer proceedings granted; matter transferred to High Court Kota Bharu
Legal Topics
Transfer of Proceedings (forum Non Conveniens), Breach of Trust (stakeholder Solicitor), Jurisdiction, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Trusts and Fiduciary Duties Contract Law Property Law Transfer of Proceedings (forum Non Conveniens) Breach of Trust (stakeholder Solicitor) Jurisdiction Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IB BUILBER SDN BHD

Appellant/plaintiff

TETUAN TEO & CHEW

Respondent/defendant 1

UNG ENG HUAT

Respondent/defendant 2

MISI ARMADA SDN BHD

Respondent/defendant 3

SALLEH BIN IDRIS

Respondent/defendant 4

NURUL ASMAT BINTI CHE AYUB

Respondent/defendant 5

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal Against High Court Order (transfer of Venue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should exercise its discretion under Order 57 r.1(4) KKM 2012 to transfer the proceedings
  2. 2 Which forum has the closest nexus to the dispute
  3. 3 Whether the cause of action and material facts arose in Kota Bharu or Kuala Lumpur

Ratio Decidendi

The transfer application was allowed because the closest and most real connection to the cause of action is Kota Bharu: the Development Agreement and prior related litigation originated and were adjudicated there, the defendants reside and carry on business there, and material payments and events occurred in Kota Bharu; exercising the court's discretion under Order 57 r.1(4) to transfer to the High Court Kota Bharu was therefore appropriate and just.

Court Disposition

Application to transfer proceedings granted; matter transferred to High Court Kota Bharu

Orders

  • Proceedings transferred to the High Court at Kota Bharu, Kelantan
  • Application in Document (Kandungan) 12 allowed