Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Time‑bar/limitation

Legal area

Court

18 Dec 2025

ALM TRADING SDN BHD CS NAM SDN BHD

Citation

WA-12BNCC-15-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCC-15-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: the plaintiff's contemporaneous documentary evidence together with signed letters and part payments constituted acknowledgements under s.26(2) Limitation Act 1953, rendering the action not time-barred; the defendant's denials were unsubstantiated and its counterclaim lacked contractual basis and evidential support, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
5 Mar 2025

1. ) Tan Lai Whatt Sebastian 2. ) Yau Wai Kin 3. ) MRS KOH BEE GEOK NEE TAN 4. ) HENG CHO KHEE 5. ) HOWE SOO LIAN 6. ) Lee Yong Yeow 7. ) Audrey Teoh Jo Ann 8. ) Phua Kie Hwee 9. ) ALBERT LEONG KUM HOONG 10. ) WONG YUN HAR MIRANDA 11. ) WON

Citation

BA-22NCvC-219-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-219-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The challenge to the 48-month completion period is time-barred because a cause of action attacking valid contractual clauses accrued on execution of the SPAs per Obata-Ambak; therefore LAD based solely on the 36→48 month difference cannot be recovered unless delay extends beyond the valid 48 months. However, the legality and effect of the Controller's wholesale exemption for the Private Lease Scheme raise substantial questions of law (potential conflict with HDA, NLC, STA, SMA and Loh Tina precedent) that cannot be resolved on a striking out application and require trial (or a contested O14A)…
3 Feb 2025

Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara (SPAN) Eco Sky Development Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-B52-61-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52-61-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court held that under Peraturan 2011 the relevant "harga jualan" for calculating KWSMP is determined by the sale status as at the date of submission of the final inspection notice (29.11.2017); the plaintiff's cause of action only accrued when full supporting documents were produced on 02.10.2023 so the claim is not time‑barred; defendant under‑declared and owes RM660,639.70, plus interest and costs.
9 Jul 2021

STAMFORD COLLEGE BHD (No. Syarikat: 194977-A) 1. SERI STAMFORD COLLEGE SDN BHD (dahulu dikenali sebagai Stamford College (PJ) Sdn Bhd) (No. Syarikat: 184286-A) 2. STAMFORD COLLEGE (MALACCA) SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 260914-A)

Citation

WA-22NCC-387-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-387-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

SCB failed to discharge its burden to prove a continuous running account or contemporaneous documentary basis for treating historical entries as a single blended debt; absent that proof the individual annual debts are time-barred under s.6(1)(a) Limitation Act 1953, except for specific management and royalty entries of September 2012 evidenced by a journal voucher and schedule; the counterclaims lacked reliable documentary proof and were dismissed.
1 Jan 1900

Mohd Nasir bin Ismail (No. K/P : 64010-07-5171) Public Bank Berhad (No. Syarikat : 6463-H)

Citation

KA-11A-2-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-11A-2-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was allowed because the defendant's application to amend the defence was procedurally defective (wrong rule and inadequate notice), the proposed counterclaim was not properly pleaded as part of the defence but attached separately, the amendment sought to introduce a new cause of action that changed the character of the suit and was time-barred from the date of dismissal in 2010; accordingly the Magistrate's order permitting the amendment was set aside and the amendment refused; costs awarded to the appellant RM2,000.
AZALI B BAKAR V

Citation

AZALI B BAKAR V
Court

Malaysian court

The court held that a declaratory order was an appropriate remedy to determine the parties' rights where liability was disputed and the subject building was not complete at the time of filing; applying the Privy Council's construction in Loh Wai Lian, clause 18 created an obligation to pay a single ascertainable sum which only became due when the building was completed and vacant possession could be delivered, therefore the limitation period under s.6(1)(a) did not begin on 12 December 1986 and the claim was not time‑barred; consequentially the plaintiff was entitled to LAD at RM13.62 per day…

Malaysia Case Law

ALM TRADING SDN BHD CS NAM SDN BHD

1. ) Tan Lai Whatt Sebastian 2. ) Yau Wai Kin 3. ) MRS KOH BEE GEOK NEE TAN 4. ) HENG CHO KHEE 5. ) HOWE SOO LIAN 6. ) Lee Yong Yeow 7. ) Audrey Teoh Jo Ann 8. ) Phua Kie Hwee 9. ) ALBERT LEONG KUM HOONG 10. ) WONG YUN HAR MIRANDA 11. ) WON

Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara (SPAN) Eco Sky Development Sdn Bhd

STAMFORD COLLEGE BHD (No. Syarikat: 194977-A) 1. SERI STAMFORD COLLEGE SDN BHD (dahulu dikenali sebagai Stamford College (PJ) Sdn Bhd) (No. Syarikat: 184286-A) 2. STAMFORD COLLEGE (MALACCA) SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 260914-A)

Mohd Nasir bin Ismail (No. K/P : 64010-07-5171) Public Bank Berhad (No. Syarikat : 6463-H)

AZALI B BAKAR V