Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

LADANG VENU (M) SDN. BHD. D Pristine Medini Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-22NCvC-187-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

BA-22NCvC-187-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff failed to prove misrepresentation or breach; the architect's Form F1 was valid for the partial completion of Tower 1 and Tower 2 after requisite approvals, the Defendant delivered vacant possession in accordance with the SPA, and therefore Plaintiff's claims for rescission, refunds and damages were dismissed.

25 Oct 2021

1. ) Rubhen Nair A/L Pradunman 2. ) Jesmeen Kaur A/ Ranjit Singh 1. ) Talent Team Sdn Bhd 2. ) Tetuan Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis

Citation: WA-12ANCvC-93-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court: High Court
Case number: WA-12ANCvC-93-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

RM5,000 was paid as a stakeholder sum to solicitors and not a booking deposit; therefore LAD runs from date of the SPA (18.11.2015); the extensions of time granted by the Housing Controller are valid and, if to be impugned, must be challenged by judicial review in the High Court; a court in these proceedings must not order release of stakeholder funds contrary to clause 30(3) SPA and s22E HDA because that would require stakeholders to breach statutory, fiduciary and professional duties and constitute an abuse of process.