ZEME TRADE (M) SDN BHD 1. KETUA SETIAUSAHA KEMENTERIAN PELAJARAN MALAYSIA 2. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

ZEME TRADE (M) SDN BHD 1. KETUA SETIAUSAHA KEMENTERIAN PELAJARAN MALAYSIA 2. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Court allowed only the unpaid balance of RM335,510.18 because the defendants did not dispute the figure and failed to particularize the alleged non‑compliance with the Deed of Assignment; claims for Variation Order and Variation of Price were dismissed for lack of evidence of agreement/approval and because allowing VOP would exceed the Assigned Sum ceiling; liquidated damages claim was dismissed because it was not pleaded with material facts despite omnibus prayer.

Citation
DA-21NCVC-2-02/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Zeme Trade (M) Sdn Bhd; Defendant 1: Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia; Defendant 2: Kerajaan Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 September 2020
Case Number
DA-21NCVC-2-02/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim Construction/contract / High Court Judgment on Trial (disposition Issued)
Outcome
Judgment entered for plaintiff in part; plaintiff awarded RM335,510.18; remaining claims dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Deed of Assignment, Progress Payments, Variation Orders, Variation of Price, Certificate of Practical Completion, Pleadings and Omnibus Prayer, Proof of Special Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Construction Law Public Procurement Civil Procedure Deed of Assignment Progress Payments Variation Orders Variation of Price +3 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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zeme Trade (M) Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia

Defendant 1

Kerajaan Malaysia

Defendant 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim Construction/contract / High Court Judgment on Trial (disposition Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff was entitled to balance of assigned sum under the Deed of Assignment
  2. 2 Whether Variation Order claim was payable/approved by SD Com and the supervising officer
  3. 3 Whether Variation of Price claim was payable and whether it would exceed the Assigned Sum ceiling

Ratio Decidendi

Court allowed only the unpaid balance of RM335,510.18 because the defendants did not dispute the figure and failed to particularize the alleged non‑compliance with the Deed of Assignment; claims for Variation Order and Variation of Price were dismissed for lack of evidence of agreement/approval and because allowing VOP would exceed the Assigned Sum ceiling; liquidated damages claim was dismissed because it was not pleaded with material facts despite omnibus prayer.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for plaintiff in part; plaintiff awarded RM335,510.18; remaining claims dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Claim allowed for RM335,510.18 in favour of the plaintiff
  • Claims for Variation Order (RM184,190.60) and Variation of Price (RM1,140,055.24) dismissed