Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Payment dispute

Legal area

Court

29 Jan 2026

CHEONG CHOY KERUING TEKNIK SDN BHD

Citation

DI-B52NCvC-2-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

DI-B52NCvC-2-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Because defendant issued work orders and Certificates of Contractor Completion (CCC) and processed payments for January–May 2022, it was estopped from treating those payments as 'advance payments' to justify withholding sums for June–September 2022; on the balance of probabilities the court accepted plaintiff's evidence and allowed plaintiff's claim in the quantified amounts, while permitting limited allowed deductions (diesel) and rejecting defendant's counterclaim.
24 Apr 2025

WABAG MUHIBBAH JV SDN BHD USAHA SELALU SDN BHD

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-26-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-26-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court finding that the plaintiff had accepted defendant's debit notes only under protest and was not estopped from claiming the outstanding sums; the Payment Summary dated 19.01.2019 was issued, certified and checked by defendant and thereby superseded the earlier debit notes as the basis for outstanding liability of RM400,218.14; defendant could not later revert to relying on the debit notes. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
7 Jun 2024

INFINITY FREIGHT SERVICES & SOLUTIONS SDN. BHD. MY JET XPRESS AIRLINES SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCC-147-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCC-147-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff established a prima facie case supported by contemporaneous documents and admissions; defendant failed to demonstrate a real or bona fide defence or triable issues (allegations of conspiracy were unpleaded and speculative); therefore summary judgment was appropriate and the defendant's counterclaim disclosed no reasonable cause and was struck out.
10 May 2024

HATIMUDA SDN BHD 1. ) Kerajaan Negeri Sembilan 2. ) SETIAUSAHA KERAJAAN NEGERI SEMBILAN 3. ) SYARIKAT AIR NEGERI SEMBILAN SDN BHD

Citation

NA-21C-1-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-21C-1-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff's claims failed because the contracts were Design and Build fixed price contracts which barred additional quantity and provisional-sum claims absent written approval by the Project Director, which approval was not obtained; accordingly defendants were not liable and the claim was dismissed.
8 Jan 2024

1. ) MD HASSAN BIN ABDUL KADIR 2. ) MUHAMMAD RABBANI BIN MD HASSAN CYCLETONE SDN BHD

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-31-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-31-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appellate court upheld the trial judge’s factual findings that the plaintiff provided sufficient as‑built drawings and invoices and completed the works; the defendant witnesses lacked credibility; and a written assurance by the main contractor (D1) amounted to a commitment to pay outstanding sums, entitling the plaintiff to RM666,932.56.
16 Nov 2023

AYAM BINTANG ISTIMEWA SDN. BHD. TERA VA SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-24C-55-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24C-55-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found TV failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Adjudication Decision was procured by fraud (s.15(a)) and failed to show denial of natural justice (s.15(b)); the Adjudicator had considered material and afforded opportunity to be heard and was entitled to take investigatory initiative under s.25(i); consequently the Setting Aside OS was dismissed and leave to enforce the Adjudication Decision was granted under s.28 CIPAA 2012 as the statutory conditions were satisfied.
6 Oct 2022

Lai Chee Mung TRAFEL REKA SDN BHD

Citation

CA-12BNCC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CA-12BNCC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the High Court found plaintiff proved its claim: plaintiff's tax invoices and official receipts established the amounts due and the defendant failed to prove that the additional documents and cheques were payments to the plaintiff; defendant's failure to call corroborating witnesses (notably his wife) and to produce official receipts for the disputed payments rendered his evidence insufficient. The Sessions Court's decision was therefore affirmed and appeal dismissed.
3 Oct 2022

ASPEN GLOVE SDN. BHD MULTI PURPOSE METAL TECH SDN. BHD.

Citation

BL-24NCvC-30-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-24NCvC-30-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court dismissed the plaintiff's interim Fortuna injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a bona fide dispute over the amount claimed; documentary admissions and correspondence established the claimed sum and inability to pay; the arbitration clause did not apply where there was no genuine dispute on the debt, and a winding‑up petition was likely to succeed if filed.
19 May 2022

Hock Kheng Construction Sdn Bhd Juntal Engineering Sdn Bhd

Citation

PA-12BNCvC-72-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12BNCvC-72-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court correctly found the plaintiff proved completion of works by production of completion/certification letters and the defendant failed to adduce evidence from SWM to substantiate its defence that payment was withheld for unsatisfactory work; those factual findings were not plainly wrong and consequently the appeal is dismissed and the Sessions Court judgment affirmed.
17 Feb 2022

PA-11ANCVC-22-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

PA-11ANCVC-22-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-11ANCVC-22-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

There was no genuine triable issue: documentary evidence (letter of appointment, invoices, payment voucher, statement of account) and unrefuted WhatsApp messages established the debt and admission; the evidential objection to WhatsApp did not raise a triable issue because the Evidence Act does not apply to affidavits and no contemporaneous dispute existed, therefore summary judgment was properly entered and the appeal is dismissed.