Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

On‑demand guarantee

Legal area

Court

19 Sept 2025

MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 1. ) NG CHEE KAE 2. ) CHYE YIAN SOANG

Citation

JA-22M-163-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22M-163-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the Letter of Guarantee to be an on‑demand guarantee creating a prima facie cause of action against the defendants; the defendants failed to raise a bona fide triable defence requiring full trial; accordingly summary judgment under Order 14 was proper and judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the claimed sum with interest and costs.
19 Sept 2025

MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 1. ) NG CHEE KAE 2. ) CHYE YIAN SOANG

Citation

JA-22M-163-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22M-163-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Letter of Guarantee (clauses 6, 7 and 7A) constitutes an on‑demand unconditional guarantee authorising concurrent remedies; plaintiff established a prima facie case and defendants failed to raise any bona fide triable issue that would require a full trial, therefore summary judgment was warranted in favour of the plaintiff.
5 Jul 2024

GAMMERLITE SDN BHD 1. ) JAMBATAN KEDUA SDN BHD 2. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD

Citation

WA-24C-22-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-22-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The performance bond was properly construed as an irrevocable on‑demand unconditional guarantee; the plaintiff failed to establish the high threshold of a strong prima facie case of unconscionability; the contractual provisions relied on by the plaintiff (including timing of Certificate of Completion) did not preclude D1 from validly making the written demand; consequently the demand lawfully triggered the bond and injunctive relief was refused.
5 Jul 2024

GAMMERLITE SDN BHD 1. ) JAMBATAN KEDUA SDN BHD 2. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD

Citation

WA-24C-22-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-22-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The performance bond was an on‑demand and unconditional guarantee payable on first written demand; the Plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case of unconscionability or other exceptional grounds to restrain payment; therefore the demand was lawful and the injunction and originating summons were dismissed with costs.
1 Jul 2024

CHINA NATIONAL TECHNICAL IMPORT & EXPORT CORPORATION 1. ) PJD LINK (M) SDN BHD 2. ) ALLIANCE BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 3. ) BANK OF CHINA (MALAYSIA) BERHAD

Citation

WA-24C-126-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-126-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Assignment of 3 April 2018 operated to assign present and future rights in the UBG to AIBB (and by vesting to ABMB); equitable assignment principles apply so the UBG, though issued later, relates back and vests in the assignee. The UBG was an unconditional, on‑demand guarantee; D1 could not unilaterally impose conditions or alter its character via the Notice of Assignment and Bank of China (Malaysia) Berhad had no capacity to accept such a modification. Therefore ABMB had the legal right to call on the UBG; the plaintiff's ex parte injunctions were unjustified and were set aside and the o…
1 Jul 2024

CHINA NATIONAL TECHNICAL IMPORT & EXPORT CORPORATION 1. ) PJD LINK (M) SDN BHD 2. ) ALLIANCE BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 3. ) BANK OF CHINA (MALAYSIA) BERHAD

Citation

WA-24C-126-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-126-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the 3 April 2018 assignment was effective to transfer present and future rights (including the subsequently issued RM63,000,000 UBG) to AIBB and thus to ABMB on vesting; an unconditional on‑demand bank guarantee cannot be altered by conditions inserted by the original beneficiary in a notice to the issuing bank; accordingly ABMB was entitled to call on the Bank Guarantee and the plaintiff's originating summons and interlocutory relief were dismissed and the ex parte orders set aside.
2 Feb 2024

GRANSTEP DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 1. ) TAN SOON LIN 2. ) TAN SOON CHER 3. ) TAN CHUI HOON 4. ) LEE TIEN LIT

Citation

WA-22C-116-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-116-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the Performance Guarantee's express terms made it an unconditional on‑demand guarantee payable upon demand without proof of contractor default; the Plaintiff's demand was therefore valid and not premature; the 5th Defendant failed to prove duress; adequate consideration existed under s80 and relevant authorities; enforcement was not unconscionable; judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the 5th Defendant for RM7,800,000 plus interest and costs.
20 Nov 2023

PESTECH TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD 1. ) MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 2. ) SYARIKAT PEMBENAAN YEOH TIONG LAY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C-92-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-92-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to discharge the high threshold to establish fraud or unconscionability; the Performance Bond is an unconditional on‑demand bond and the demand was prima facie made in accordance with its terms (termination relied upon); the contested factual and contractual issues are suited to arbitration; therefore injunctive relief to restrain payment was refused and the applications dismissed with costs.
20 Nov 2023

PESTECH TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD 1. ) MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 2. ) SYARIKAT PEMBENAAN YEOH TIONG LAY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C-92-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-92-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court refused to grant an injunction because the plaintiff failed to establish the high threshold for fraud or unconscionability: the Performance Bond is an unconditional on‑demand guarantee, the demand by D2 was prima facie made in accordance with the bond and termination cited, the disputes are essentially contractual and properly for arbitration, and there was insufficient cogent evidence of fraud/unconscionability or over‑securitisation to justify restraining payment or receipt; accordingly the originating summons was dismissed with costs.
27 Sept 2023

CHINA CONSTRUCTION YANGTZE RIVER (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD 1. ) MULTIBAY DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 2. ) CHINA CONSTRUCTION BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD

Citation

WA-24NCC-78-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-78-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court dismissed the Plaintiff's Amended Originating Summons because the 1st Defendant subsequently adduced credible post-demand evidence (re-tender documents and an Assessment Report) quantifying losses (RM67,083,500.58) that demonstrated the demand would not result in over-securitisation; the court allowed fresh evidence to be considered when assessing unconscionability and concluded there were no exceptional circumstances to restrain payment under the performance bonds.