Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Settlement agreement enforcement

Legal area

Court

18 Dec 2025

1. ) ZURAIDAH BINTI MOHD TAUFEK 2. ) NORAZIDAH BINTI MOHD TAUFEK 1. ) NORASHIDAH BINTI MOHD TAUFEK 2. ) NORAFIDAH BINTI MOHD TAUFEK

Citation

BA-24NCvC-2071-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCvC-2071-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Originating Summons is dismissed because the plaintiffs' claim relied on a valuation that is genuinely disputed on material grounds — namely the inclusion of unauthorised structures that render the valuation unlawful — and final coercive relief akin to specific performance cannot be granted via Originating Summons where key factual issues are contested.
10 Dec 2025

KAYANGAN KEMAS SDN. BHD. PEMBINAAN KERY SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-22NCvC-452-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-452-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court held that the parties concluded a binding Settlement Agreement evidenced by mutual agreement and the Defendant’s payment of four instalments; the Defendant defaulted on the fifth instalment triggering the acceleration/default clause such that the entire outstanding balance of RM5,982,199.58 became immediately due; there were no triable issues and the Defendant was estopped from raising belated defects, therefore summary judgment was granted in favour of the Plaintiff with interest and costs.
13 Aug 2025

1. ) UMAR BIN ALI BASHAH @ ALI BASHAH 2. ) TETUAN LOGHAN LAW OFFICE 1. ) MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD. 2. ) LIPUTAN CANGGIH SDN. BHD. 3. ) HADRONS CONSULTING SDN. BHD. 4. ) TETUAN ABRAHAM OOI & PARTNERS (CJ 23.12.21) PIHAK KETIGA TETUAN DAIM & GAMA

Citation

WA-22NCvC-575-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-575-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The amended defence and counterclaim were not plainly frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process and therefore could not be struck out under O.18 r.19; however, because the Court of Appeal proceedings and the stay of execution in respect of the Order to Carry Out arising from Civil Suits 215/227 have a direct and significant nexus with the issues in this action (notably the letters of instruction and payment obligations), the High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under O.92 r.4 to stay all proceedings in the main claim and counterclaim pending disposal of the appeals, and vacated th…
12 Jun 2025

KOSI ENGINEERING SDN. BHD. CHENGALJATI SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-114-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-114-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the Settlement Deed must be construed from its text: Clause 2, by use of 'notwithstanding', overrides any inconsistent parts of Clause 1 and imposes a clear deadline that the Indebtedness be settled on or before 31 December 2021; there was no contractual precondition that Turnpike Synergy's certification must precede defendant's liability; accordingly the plaintiff was entitled to the indebtedness as adjudicated and the defendant breached the Settlement Deed; the Order 14A determination was appropriate and the Notice of Application (Content 45) was allowed with costs.
12 Mar 2025

1. ) YEW TUCK CHOON 2. ) SRI AMAN BAKTI SDN. BHD. 1. ) BITARA ANGKASA SDN. BHD. 2. ) BINA HARTA HOMES SDN. BHD. 3. ) Lee Lun Teong

Citation

WA-22NCvC-419-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-419-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found no triable issue that Defendants must pay the Plaintiffs RM2,000,000 as unconditionally agreed in Clause 2.1.1 and entered summary judgment for that sum; however triable issues remain concerning the additional RM1,300,000 claimed under Clause 4.1(ii) and the quantum of items (iii) to (ix), which must proceed to trial.
13 Dec 2024

MCC OVERSEAS (M) SDN BHD DAMAI CITY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-522-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-522-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court allowed summary judgment because the defendant failed to establish any triable issue: the RM71,400,000 debt was admitted in related proceedings, the fraud allegations were unparticularised and inconsistent with contemporaneous documents and conduct (including absence of a police report and failure to raise the issue in other post‑discovery proceedings), and prior interlocutory rulings supported the plaintiff; therefore plaintiff entitled to judgment for RM71,400,000 plus interest and costs.
30 May 2024

PANG CHOW HUAT TAN LI SIN

Citation

WA-24NCvC-132-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-132-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant failed to prove coercion, duress or undue influence: her conduct (acceptance of the agreement, payment of RM 940,000 and delay of assertions) and absence of contemporaneous protest or steps to avoid the contract established voluntary consent; therefore the Settlement Agreement is enforceable and specific performance is appropriate to compel transfer of the identified Pavilion Suites unit subject to the plaintiff refunding RM 940,000 (less RM 10,000 costs) as ordered; applications to disqualify counsel and to convert the OS were dismissed as without merit.
21 Mar 2024

DATIN NAZNEEN BINTI ABDULLAH ABDUL MUNAF BIN SULTAN ABDUL KADIR

Citation

WA-B52NCvC-174-04/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52NCvC-174-04/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiff satisfied the procedural and evidential prerequisites for summary judgment under Order 14; defendant failed to discharge the burden of showing a real, triable defence. Limitation did not bar the claim because the last payment of RM150,000 on 26.05.2017 restarted the limitation period under s26 and the writ filed on 25.04.2023 was within six years. Allegations of coercion were unsubstantiated, inconsistent with contemporaneous documents and conduct and constituted a desperate afterthought. Summary judgment was therefore entered for the plaintiff for the outstanding debt with specifie…
4 Mar 2024

AXVENTURE SDN BHD APEX COMMUNICATIONS SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-22C-56-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-56-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Settlement Agreement unambiguously required the Defendant to pay specified sums by stated dates; the Defendant did not pay, admitted the sums were due in correspondence, offered no pleaded defence of fraud, duress or evidence of an undertaking letter, and the entire agreement clause barred extrinsic defences; therefore no triable issue existed and summary judgment was warranted.
3 Aug 2023

1. ) CHAN KOK SUNG 2. ) CHAN WAI KIT 1. ) ACCUPRO SDN BHD 2. ) Tan Chin Siea

Citation

B-02(NCC)(A)-2403-12/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCC
Case number

B-02(NCC)(A)-2403-12/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Appeal allowed: the winding-up order could not be relitigated by the High Court where it had been set aside in reliance on a valid settlement; respondents who proposed and partially performed the settlement cannot now deny it (clean hands/estoppel); the settlement did not constitute an undue preference because payments were made by the third party as principal from its own funds and created privity; accordingly the settlement is valid, Accupro breached by default and must pay RM221,143.28 plus 8% p.a. from 01.06.2021; guarantor Tan Chin Siea jointly and severally liable; High Court orders all…