Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Letter of indemnity

Legal area

Court

11 Apr 2025

BOUSTEAD CRUISE CENTRE SDN BHD 1. ) NIKMAT MUJUR SDN BHD 2. ) CCK PETROLEUM (LABUAN) LTD (Licensed as Labuan Commodity Trading Company)

Citation

WA-27NCC-6-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-27NCC-6-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court treated the contemporaneous survey, the Letter of Indemnity admitting collision, and the photographic/CCTV evidence as establishing a direct causal link between the Vessel's collision with the link bridge and the severe damage to the piles, supporting the plaintiff's claim of liability.
9 Dec 2022

TSA INDUSTRIES SDN BHD 1. ) XXXX 2. ) STANDARD CHARTERED BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD

Citation

BA-22NCVC-89-02/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCVC-89-02/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found on balance that 79 LOIs were forged by the 1st defendant in conspiracy with defendants 2–5 and entered judgment against 1st–5th defendants; the bank was not liable because it had exercised reasonable care in processing faxed LOIs, a clear letter of indemnity authorised reliance on faxed instructions and the plaintiff was contractually estopped by failure to query monthly statements; statutory defences and limitation arguments also supported dismissal of claim against the bank.
17 Nov 2022

1. ) LOW HAN KOK 2. ) THIAN YEN PENG 1. ) YAP SIEN TOH 2. ) KEVIN WONG WYE KEONG 3. ) LOH SHOOK FUN, AMY 4. ) CHOY LAI YI 5. ) TETUAN YEAP, YONG & AMY

Citation

WA-22NCvC-718-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-718-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to particularize and prove fraud; the Transaction Documents (SPA, PA, Trust Deed, LOI) executed as one contemporaneous transaction coherently acknowledge receipt of purchase price; Plaintiffs' inconsistent testimony undermined credibility; 2nd–5th Defendants had discharged and returned documents before redemption and transfer which was effected by another firm, so they are not liable; 1st Defendant holds an indefeasible title and is entitled to declaration of validity of SPA and to possession; double rent not awarded due to lack of tenancy evidence and absence of proof of en…
27 Oct 2022

1. ) SAFWA GLOBAL BUILDERS SDN. BHD. 2. ) BIBI NORMALA BINTI CHE ALI 3. ) MOHD HALIFI BIN ARSHAD HANSON QUARRY PRODUCTS SDN. BHD.

Citation

JB-12ANCC-4-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-12ANCC-4-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found no bona fide triable issues: documentary evidence (delivery orders, invoices) and the First Defendant's unprivileged admission established the debt; the Letter of Guarantee and Indemnity is a continuing guarantee permitting variation and therefore the guarantors remain liable beyond the alleged RM200,000 limit; defendants failed to rebut with specific documentary evidence or deny demands in affidavits, so summary judgment was appropriate.
1 Jul 2022

ALLIANCE BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD L.B.H. ENGINEERING SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-22NCC-35-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-35-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant failed to raise a bona fide triable issue: its denial was inconsistent with contemporaneous documents (joint request, board resolutions, correspondence with DBKL), it produced no substantiating evidence (no police report, no contemporaneous protest), and the plaintiff lawfully paid under an unconditional bank guarantee and is entitled to restitution/unjust enrichment; accordingly summary judgment was appropriate and entered for the plaintiff.
11 Oct 2021

COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK U.A (SINGAPORE BRANCH) 1. ) MISC BERHAD 2. ) XXXX

Citation

WA-27NCC-26-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-27NCC-26-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Discovery granted only for Category C (all correspondence between Defendants and Ruchi relating to instructions to deliver the cargo to Ruchi) because such documents were relevant and likely to show what defendants were told about the location of the bills of lading and inquiries made; discovery refused for Categories A, B, D, E, F, G and H because the documents were either irrelevant to pleaded issues, not in defendants' possession, oppressive in scope, would only show defendants' internal practice not an industry custom, or plaintiff failed to substantiate necessity.
20 Jul 2020

LONPAC INSURANCE BHD (No. Syarikat: 307414-T) 1. KORIDOR PADU SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 401936-M) 2. BASARUDIN BIN AHMAD KHAN (No. K/P: 530828-08-5859) 3. EMBI BIN BAHARI (No. K/P: 570605-08-6981)

Citation

WA-22NCC-57-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-57-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants failed to raise any credible triable issues: the alleged oral representation was inherently improbable and unsupported by contemporaneous evidence; the guarantee was unconditional on its terms; the indemnity letters were duly executed and the plaintiff properly relied on them and its collateral; therefore summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff for RM2,433,679.54 with interest and costs.

Malaysia Case Law

BOUSTEAD CRUISE CENTRE SDN BHD 1. ) NIKMAT MUJUR SDN BHD 2. ) CCK PETROLEUM (LABUAN) LTD (Licensed as Labuan Commodity Trading Company)

TSA INDUSTRIES SDN BHD 1. ) XXXX 2. ) STANDARD CHARTERED BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD

1. ) LOW HAN KOK 2. ) THIAN YEN PENG 1. ) YAP SIEN TOH 2. ) KEVIN WONG WYE KEONG 3. ) LOH SHOOK FUN, AMY 4. ) CHOY LAI YI 5. ) TETUAN YEAP, YONG & AMY

1. ) SAFWA GLOBAL BUILDERS SDN. BHD. 2. ) BIBI NORMALA BINTI CHE ALI 3. ) MOHD HALIFI BIN ARSHAD HANSON QUARRY PRODUCTS SDN. BHD.

ALLIANCE BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD L.B.H. ENGINEERING SDN. BHD.

COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK U.A (SINGAPORE BRANCH) 1. ) MISC BERHAD 2. ) XXXX

LONPAC INSURANCE BHD (No. Syarikat: 307414-T) 1. KORIDOR PADU SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 401936-M) 2. BASARUDIN BIN AHMAD KHAN (No. K/P: 530828-08-5859) 3. EMBI BIN BAHARI (No. K/P: 570605-08-6981)