Malaysia Case Law

2 Nov 2020

CHUEN SIN MARKETING (PERAK) SDN BHD SUSTAINED RESOURCES SDN BHD

Citation

AD-A72NCC-2-5/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Court

Magistrates' Court

Case number

AD-A72NCC-2-5/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 preliminary requirements and thus established a prima facie case, shifting the burden to Defendant; Defendant, by affidavit and statutory declaration and supported by contemporaneous material (CTOS, signed delivery orders, denial of service), raised bona fide triable issues (ownership transfer, payments by third party, limitation, service) which could not be resolved on affidavit and therefore summary judgment must be refused and the matters proceed to full trial.

• Summary judgment
• Triable issue
• Statutory declaration
• Limitation
• Agency/authority
• Service of documents

4 Mar 2020

Viva Venture PLT 1. Beh Joo Seong 2. Lee Lin Kwai

Citation

WA-12ANCVC-153-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

WA-12ANCVC-153-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Clause 27 required an executed Guarantee Agreement within the notice period and did not operate as a deemed personal guarantee; there was no evidence of the required notification or execution of the Guarantee Agreement, plaintiff elected to proceed with the lease despite non-execution and thereby lost the contractual mechanism to enforce personal guarantees; a director’s signature on the Letter of Offer was in a representative capacity and did not bind him personally; the claim against the directors disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was properly struck out under Order 18 r 19 KKM 20…

• Personal guarantee
• Order 18 rule 19 striking out
• Enforceability of guarantee clause
• Agency/authority
• Piercing the corporate veil

HOO SEE SEN & ANOR. V. PUBLIC BANK BHD. & ANOR.

Citation

HOO SEE SEN & ANOR. V. PUBLIC BANK BHD. & ANOR.

Court

Malaysian court

The deed of assignment did not authorise the bank to give the undertaking or to disburse funds to the vendor in circumstances where the vendor owed a larger sum to the appellants; the bank was holding and disbursing funds only as agent for the appellants and therefore had no authority to pay the vendor; accordingly the appeal was allowed and an interim injunction was warranted to restrain payment.

• Sale and purchase agreement
• Assignment of benefits
• Liquidated damages
• Bank undertaking
• Injunction
• Agency/authority