5 Mar 2025
GLENN WILLIAM ONEILL CHANG AI NEE
- Citation
- WA-24NCvC-3302-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Court
- High Court
- Case number
- WA-24NCvC-3302-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
The Court held the Plaintiff validly terminated the SPA: the Defendant's repeated failure to pay the balance within the completion and extended periods triggered the SPA's termination clause; extensions granted by the Vendor did not prevent termination and were within the Vendor's discretion under s64 Contracts Act 1950; where time was of the essence non-adherence rendered the contract voidable under s56(1); originating summons was the correct procedure because the dispute was primarily one of construction and law.