UBAIDULLA & CO. SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 10395-P) 1. CLD DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 551828-U) 2. KEMAJUAN ROWTHER SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 22682-X)

UBAIDULLA & CO. SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 10395-P) 1. CLD DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 551828-U) 2. KEMAJUAN ROWTHER SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 22682-X)

The Court of Appeal held that the Plaintiff is entitled to receive the sales price for semi-detached units that have been completed and delivered to purchasers because the cause of action for those units accrued upon completion and delivery of vacant possession; the prior dismissal in Suit 516 for prematurity did...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
W-02(NCVC)(W)-407-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Ubaidulla & Co. Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent: CLD Development Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent: Kemajuan Rowther Sdn. Bhd.
Court
NCVC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 June 2020
Case Number
W-02(NCVC)(W)-407-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) From High Court Civil Suit / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside in part
Legal Topics
Share Sale Agreement, Sale of Property, Completion and Payment, Res Judicata, Estoppel, Accrual of Cause of Action, Vacant Possession, Construction Completion
Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Share Sale Agreement Sale of Property Completion and Payment Res Judicata Estoppel +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ubaidulla & Co. Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant

CLD Development Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent

Kemajuan Rowther Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) From High Court Civil Suit / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sale price of semi-detached units falls due upon completion of each individual unit or upon completion of all units
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff's claim is premature given prior Suit No. D-22-516-2009
  3. 3 Whether doctrine of res judicata or estoppel bars the present claim

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Plaintiff is entitled to receive the sales price for semi-detached units that have been completed and delivered to purchasers because the cause of action for those units accrued upon completion and delivery of vacant possession; the prior dismissal in Suit 516 for prematurity did not require collective completion of all units and therefore res judicata and estoppel do not bar the present claims; however the RM56,000 difference tied expressly to completion of all exchanged units remains payable only upon completion of unit SD36.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside in part

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Order of the High Court dismissing Plaintiff's claim set aside