Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Continuing guarantee

Legal area

Court

8 Jan 2026

1. ) YONG KOK YEAP 2. ) FANG CHEE PENG URUSWAJAR CONCRETE SDN BHD

Citation

BA-12B-35-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-35-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because the original Continuing Guarantee & Indemnity, as produced and inspected, established the defendants as guarantors for MKP Builders; there was no admissible evidence that the guarantee was for Element Flash; the contract terms made the guarantors principal debtors and liable independently of proceedings against MKP Builders; the plaintiff's signed statement of indebtedness was conclusive as to the amount owed; accordingly the High Court upheld the Sessions Court decision and awarded costs.
19 Nov 2024

AMBANK(M) BERHAD 1. ) PRECIOUS CONCRETE SDN BHD 2. ) C&L MINERALS SDN BHD 3. ) LAW THIEN LOY 4. ) CHUAH CHONG EE 5. ) CHOO KHEN LON

Citation

WA-22NCC-301-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-301-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the Plaintiff proved a prima facie case and the Defendants failed to demonstrate any bona fide defence or triable issue; the continuing Guarantee and Indemnity bound the 2nd to 5th Defendants notwithstanding resignation or rescheduling; the Certificate of Indebtedness was unchallenged and therefore conclusive absent manifest error; summary judgment entered for Plaintiff against 2nd to 5th Defendants for the specified sums; claim against 1st Defendant struck out due to winding up with liberty to file afresh.
19 Nov 2024

AMBANK(M) BERHAD 1. ) PRECIOUS CONCRETE SDN BHD 2. ) C&L MINERALS SDN BHD 3. ) LAW THIEN LOY 4. ) CHUAH CHONG EE 5. ) CHOO KHEN LON

Citation

WA-22NCC-301-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-301-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants failed to demonstrate any bona fide defence or manifest error in the Certificate of Indebtedness; the guarantees are continuing and enforceable despite resignation or rescheduling; therefore summary judgment is appropriate and the 2nd–5th Defendants are liable for the sums claimed; the claim against the 1st Defendant is struck out due to winding up with liberty to file afresh.
23 Aug 2024

AHMAD NIZAR BIN SAFIAN MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

Citation

WA-12ANCC-59-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-59-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's summary judgment: the Appellant failed to demonstrate any bona fide defence or produce contemporaneous documentary evidence of a discharge; the guarantee was an express continuing guarantee not discharged by resignation or debt restructuring, and therefore summary judgment was properly entered against the Appellant.
31 Jul 2024

Mohd Zawawi bin Taib Mulberry Paper Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-12BNCC-15-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BNCC-15-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court's factual findings that the letter of guarantee existed and was signed by the Appellant were supported by contemporaneous evidence and credible witness testimony; the Appellant failed to prove forgery on the balance of probabilities (no police report, inconsistent and comparable signatures); issues not raised at trial regarding validity and formal defects could not be properly considered on appeal; therefore the trial judgment was not plainly wrong and must be affirmed.
10 May 2024

United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd 1. ) TRT Engineering (M) Sdn. Bhd 2. ) Subramaniam A/L Natesan 3. ) Geetha A/P Trimoorthi 4. ) Sarina Binti Mohd Ali

Citation

BL-22NCC-16-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-22NCC-16-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff fulfilled the statutory and evidential prerequisites for judgment under Order 14; defendants failed to adduce affidavits or contemporaneous documentary evidence raising triable issues or demonstrating that notification letters or any alleged collateral agreement varied the written facility terms; guarantor clause rendered defendants liable as principal debtors; therefore summary judgment was appropriate and granted with costs.
6 Dec 2023

1. ) TAI WENG CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING SDN. BHD. 2. ) WONG YEW WOH POSIM MARKETING SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-12ANCC-42-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-42-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Summary judgment was properly granted and affirmed because the plaintiff proved the debt with invoices, delivery orders and debit notes and the 1st defendant admitted liability in writing, rendering the defendants' challenges mere afterthoughts and estopped, therefore no triable issues existed under Order 14 ROC.
30 Nov 2023

BUMISETIA POWER SDN BHD TAN CHIN SIEA

Citation

BA-22NCvC-130-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-130-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because the plaintiff sought to rely on material facts and detailed particulars (non‑contribution of capital, diversion of proceeds and LAD) that were not pleaded in the statement of claim; the Court therefore disregarded those unpleaded facts and related evidence, leaving the pleaded case unproven on the balance of probabilities. Further, even if those matters were admissible, issues already ventilated and decided in the Sandakan Suit attracted res judicata/issue estoppel considerations and the Court may not adopt findings from that judgment where appeals…
30 Nov 2023

BUMISETIA POWER SDN BHD TAN CHIN SIEA

Citation

BA-22NCvC-130-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-130-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 requirements and the Sandakan High Court judgment conclusively established that KSSB owed RM889,864.66 to the plaintiff; the defendant failed to raise a bona fide triable defence and is estopped from re-litigating matters decided in the Sandakan suit; summary judgment was therefore properly entered for RM889,864.66 with costs.
25 Sept 2023

KASRAN BIN YAHYA MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-353-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-353-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the present suit is barred by res judicata in the wider sense given prior proceedings (summary judgment, receiving and adjudication orders, dismissed appeals and related proceedings) raising the same or related issues; the guarantee's continuing clauses bind the plaintiff and the alleged new information was not concealed, therefore the writ and statement of claim are struck out under Order 18 r19(1).