Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Completion period

Legal area

Court

24 Jun 2022

WA-22NCVC-120-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

WA-22NCVC-120-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCVC-120-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Where the contractual document and the date of handing over vacant possession were undisputed and the sole dispute concerned the legal question of the applicable completion period, the court properly exercised its discretion under Orders 14A, 33 and 34 to determine the legal issue without a full trial and allowed the Plaintiff's application.
12 May 2022

1. ) RAJOO A/L PARIASAMY 2. ) NOEL YEO LIP SIN 3. ) ANDREW TAN MEN XIAN 4. ) TAN TEOW ANN 5. ) TEO HOCK CHOON 6. ) TEO WEI ZHEN, RYAN 7. ) YONG KWA SIEW PREMA BONANZA SDN. BHD. PIHAK KETIGA DICADANGKAN 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI PE

Citation

WA-22NCvC-674-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-674-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The statutory 36-month completion period applies and is calculated from payment of booking fees; any purported extension to 54 months is invalid; discounts cannot be deducted for calculating the late delivery penalty and are not refundable as they formed part of the contractual offer, therefore the defendant has no defence and its counterclaim fails.
6 Apr 2022

1. ) Kok Sue Lynn 2. ) Julia Soh Ming Yee 3. ) Lai Wai Hong 4. ) Yeap Li Ching 5. ) Yeap Dah Shen 6. ) Lim Liwu 7. ) Priscilla Cheah Siow Wen Mayfair Ventures Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-22NCvC-284-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-284-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs had locus standi under clause 8 of the statutory Schedule H SPA; Schedule H fixes a 36-month completion period which cannot validly be varied to 42 months absent valid, communicated approval which was not produced; LAD is payable from the date of payment of the booking fee; defendant failed to establish any triable issue or valid settlement precluding the LAD claims, and therefore summary judgment for the plaintiffs was proper.

Malaysia Case Law

WA-22NCVC-120-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

1. ) RAJOO A/L PARIASAMY 2. ) NOEL YEO LIP SIN 3. ) ANDREW TAN MEN XIAN 4. ) TAN TEOW ANN 5. ) TEO HOCK CHOON 6. ) TEO WEI ZHEN, RYAN 7. ) YONG KWA SIEW PREMA BONANZA SDN. BHD. PIHAK KETIGA DICADANGKAN 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI PE

1. ) Kok Sue Lynn 2. ) Julia Soh Ming Yee 3. ) Lai Wai Hong 4. ) Yeap Li Ching 5. ) Yeap Dah Shen 6. ) Lim Liwu 7. ) Priscilla Cheah Siow Wen Mayfair Ventures Sdn Bhd