Malaysia Case Law

2 Mar 2022

PT JAFFARINDO PALM MAS 1. ) DAUD BIN BANDA 2. ) REWATHY A/P SANDRAN (berniaga atas nama dan gaya RDR Multiresources Trading) 3. ) AHMAD HUSSAIN 4. ) MAHMOOD HUSSAIN

Citation

BL-22NCvC-8-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

BL-22NCvC-8-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Security for costs of RM40,000 was ordered to be paid into the defendant's solicitors' client account within 14 days because the plaintiff is incorporated abroad and has no assets in Malaysia, making enforcement of costs uncertain; the plaintiff's assertion of financial strength and merits did not outweigh the risk of inability to enforce costs.

• Security for costs
• Foreign plaintiff
• Enforcement of costs

26 Jan 2022

DCN DIVING PACIFIC LTE LTD 1. AHMAD FAIZAL BIN OTHMAN 2. BAZALANUL' AZAM BIN YUSOF 3. KHAIRUL ARIF BIN AHMAD KHALIL 4. RUHM MARINE SDN BHD 5. RUHM HOLDINGS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCVC-668-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

WA-22NCVC-668-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The defendants failed to discharge the burden of showing circumstances justifying security for costs under Order 23 r.1; foreign registration and asserted complexity are insufficient, and the requested combined RM1,000,000 was oppressive and unlikely to reflect actual costs, therefore the applications for security were dismissed.

• Security for costs
• Foreign plaintiff
• Costs
• Inducement to breach contract
• Court discretion

25 Jan 2021

wa-22ncvc-668-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

wa-22ncvc-668-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

wa-22ncvc-668-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applications for security for costs dismissed because defendants failed to show circumstances justifying security under Order 23 Rule 1; foreign registration alone insufficient; no evidence plaintiff would be unable to pay costs; requested combined sum was oppressive and disproportionate.

• Security for costs
• Order 23 rule 1
• Conspiracy to induce breach of contract
• Foreign plaintiff
• Costs

ANANDA TRADING (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD. V. PALMERSTON HOLDINGS SDN. BHD.

Citation

ANANDA TRADING (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD. V. PALMERSTON HOLDINGS SDN. BHD.

Court

Malaysian court

The court exercised its discretion under O.23 r.1(1): foreign residency alone does not automatically require security for costs, but where the defendant holds plaintiff's progressive payments/deposits in Malaysia adequate to cover potential costs those funds are assets within the jurisdiction; accordingly security was ordered at RM10,000 per affected case while applications in three related cases were withdrawn.

• Security for costs
• Foreign plaintiff
• S.433b national land code
• Approval by foreign investment committee
• Costs