Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Remoteness of damage

Legal area

Court

23 May 2025

CAPAIAN UNGGUL SDN. BHD. DELTA ZEEFORCE SECURITY SERVICES SDN. BHD.

Citation

BL-B52NCvC-17-05/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BL-B52NCvC-17-05/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the defendant breached its express contractual obligation and was negligent in the custody of the plaintiff's warehouse property by failing to provide adequate security performance, failing to notify and lodge a timely police report, and remaining unresponsive to invoice/rectification liaison; plaintiff validly mitigated by procuring the lowest competitive quotation and is entitled to RM74,589 for repair costs with interest; claim for RM650,000 loss of rental is dismissed as remote and not supported by pleadings or the relevant contractual period.
23 May 2025

CAPAIAN UNGGUL SDN. BHD. DELTA ZEEFORCE SECURITY SERVICES SDN. BHD.

Citation

BL-B52NCvC-17-05/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BL-B52NCvC-17-05/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the defendant breached express and implied contractual duties and was negligent in the care and custody of the warehouse property; the plaintiff reasonably mitigated losses, the Eone Electrical quotation and invoice were contemporaneous and unobjected to by defendant, therefore RM74,589.00 for repair (plus interest) was recoverable; the claimed RM650,000.00 for loss of rental was dismissed as too remote, not pleaded for the relevant period and outside the defendant's tenure.
20 Nov 2023

INTERGATEWAY FREIGHT SDN BHD SAM KAR CHYI

Citation

PA-22NCvC-165-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-165-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that Defendant caused the full loss; Defendant was not privy to the plaintiff’s contract with Sanmina or the alleged 180-day invoicing term; Plaintiff failed to mitigate and exhaust remedies against Sanmina and accepted a partial settlement, and allowing recovery from Defendant would risk double recovery and be remote; accordingly Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.
10 Sept 2023

ZARLYNX SDN. BHD. 1. ) ZOL-MANIAM ENTERPRISE SDN. BHD. 2. ) SUBRAMANIAM A/L SAMUGAM 3. ) M JANAGI A/P MUTHUSAMY

Citation

JA-22NCvC-127-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-127-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff established some compensable loss from D1's breach but failed to prove special or exemplary losses and future/remote losses; court quantified proven general damages at RM265,840 and apportioned liability 70% to D1 and 30% to Plaintiff because the machine operated at only 30% capacity; interest and costs awarded accordingly.
3 Jul 2023

1. ) ONE ISKANDAR SDN BHD 2. ) RIO TINTO RESOURCES SDN. BHD. (dikenali sebelum ini sebagai 725 DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.) SPNB ASPIRASI SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-269-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-269-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The JVA/SA expressly made obtainment of banking facilities a condition precedent to the SPA; financing was not obtained within the stipulated periods so the SPA and the related JVA/SA ceased to be effective, the written entire-agreement and no-variation clauses precluded reliance on prior or subsequent oral arrangements, and the Plaintiffs failed to prove any causal, non-remote special damages; accordingly the Plaintiffs’ claim fails and is dismissed.
16 Jan 2023

1. ) Eco Hijau Semula Sdn Bhd 2. ) Greenbio Technology Sdn Bhd Mohd Najeib Bin Ahmad Walat (berniaga sebagai Pemilik Tunggal di bawah nama dan gaya 'Triple A Aura Resources')

Citation

BA-22C-17-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22C-17-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The four Letters of Award dated 7.11.2019 constituted binding agreements accepted by the Plaintiffs through unequivocal conduct (performance, procurement, attendance, invoices, progress reports); the Defendant was estopped from denying the contracts; the Defendant's termination letters were unlawful and constituted breaches on 5.1.2020; damages under s 74(1) Contracts Act 1950 are recoverable — the value of works was recoverable as arising in the usual course, and loss of profit was foreseeable and recoverable — therefore the Defendant must pay the specified sums, interest and costs.
12 May 2022

SKKPJ (TM) SDN. BHD. Kerajaan Negeri Terengganu

Citation

T-01(IM)-373-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

T-01(IM)-373-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Plaintiff is entitled to claim loss of profits under s.74 Contracts Act 1950; however damages were correctly limited to the area of sub-block A because only that sub-block had an issued licence from JPNT and the licence was a precondition to extraction; Deputy Registrar's valuation methodology and credibility findings were upheld and the High Court decision affirming award of RM 12,017,108.78 was affirmed; appeals dismissed.
31 Jan 2022

CLEARPATH MARKETING SDN BHD MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

Citation

WA-22NCVC-168-03/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCVC-168-03/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the Homing Pigeon agreements void or sham under s57 Contracts Act 1950 and, in any event, the alleged losses derived from those agreements were too remote, unforeseeable and unpleaded; special damages were not strictly proved; therefore the Plaintiff's claims for damages failed and were dismissed with costs to the Defendant.
9 Nov 2021

KARUN KLASIK SDN BHD TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

Citation

W-02(IM)(NCC)-609-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-02(IM)(NCC)-609-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

High Court judge erred in rejecting unchallenged primary oral and documentary evidence of destroyed processed stock and in focusing on cost of raw materials; correct measure is market value/loss of profit recoverable for destroyed processed goods; Appellant proved loss; deduction of 20% for failure to mitigate is appropriate; award for wages limited to 13 days; general damages increased from nominal sum.
20 Sept 2021

SPEKTRA SEGMEN SDN BHD TC AUTOWORLD SDN BHD

Citation

22-1552-2006 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

22-1552-2006 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Registrar's award for the full claimed sum was set aside because the Defendant failed to prove the crucial causal link that the 2009 injunction necessitated a 3-metre setback and consequent rebuilding costs; the Plaintiff could not avoid liability simply because the Defendant did not obtain the Plaintiff's prior approval, but only proven demolition costs actually incurred (RM 403,200.00) were recoverable while speculative/reconstruction costs were too remote or hypothetical.