Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Indemnity clause interpretation

Legal area

Court

11 Sept 2024

HASHIM BANI BIN AB HAMID CHEVRON MALAYSIA LIMITED

Citation

DA-22NCvC-4-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCvC-4-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application under Order 14A is dismissed because material factual disputes exist as to contractual responsibility and causation for the underground tank leak and contamination which cannot be resolved without a full trial; some issues raised are also already determined by earlier interlocutory judgment engaging res judicata, thus the Order 14A criteria are not met and summary final disposal is inappropriate.
16 Dec 2020

1. SWM Greentech Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat: 1068667-X) 2. SWM Environment Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat: 380208-V) 1. Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara 2. Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

JA-24NCvC-200-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-24NCvC-200-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that on objective contractual construction Clause 13.4 obliges the 2nd Defendant to hold the Plaintiffs harmless and that the issuance of a demand and the institution of the SAJ Ranhill proceedings triggered the indemnity; consequently declaratory relief was appropriate and the court granted declarations that the indemnity is enforceable and that the Defendants are liable to indemnify the Plaintiffs against any judgment or order in the SAJ Ranhill action.