Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Counterclaim and set-off

Legal area

Court

9 Jan 2026

BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA ARTE PLUS @ JALAN AMPANG 1. ) AMPANG PROPERTY SDN. BHD. 2. ) N JAYA SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-24NCvC-4892-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-4892-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found no substantial disputes of fact on the plaintiff's statutory claim under s15 Act 757 that could not be resolved on affidavit evidence; the second defendant failed to substantiate alleged transit losses or justify non-disclosure by PDPA; conversion to a writ was therefore unnecessary and disproportionate; the appropriate procedural remedy was to strike out the counterclaim sua sponte with liberty to file a fresh writ so the plaintiff's originating summons may proceed unimpeded.
27 Feb 2023

GD BUILDERS SDN BHD CTY FACADE BUILDER SDN BHD

Citation

WA-24C-216-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24C-216-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the adjudicator lawfully exercised jurisdiction under CIPAA, did not breach natural justice or exceed jurisdiction in admitting and deciding the claimed items after evaluating evidence, the adjudication award stands and is enforceable under s28 CIPAA, and the application to set aside the adjudication decision is dismissed with costs.
17 Aug 2022

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Lonpac Insurance Berhad PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Embi bin Bahari

Citation

WA-29NCC-1006-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1006-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The AIO/notice was filed within the seven-day period when computed under Rules of Court O.3 r.2(5); however the AIO failed to particularise and quantify any counterclaim/set-off to meet the statutory threshold under s3(1)(i), therefore it could not operate to set aside the Bankruptcy Notice. The inclusion of appellate costs and allocatur in the Bankruptcy Notice was lawful because those orders relate specifically to the single principal judgment. The issuance of the Bankruptcy Notice did not breach ss5(3)-(6) IA 1967; leave under s5 is not a precondition to issuing a BN and any challenge on s…
16 Aug 2022

Lim Beng Kuan Helms Geomarine Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

WA-22NCC-130-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-130-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found the Commission Agreement unambiguous and binding, the Defendant produced no credible evidence of any variation making payment conditional on Dolphin's consent or on receipt of the retention sum, the Assignment Deed transferred rights to the Plaintiff and was notified to the Defendant, and the Defendant's counterclaim arose from a separate contract and did not raise a bona fide triable issue to defeat the partial summary judgment; accordingly partial summary judgment was granted for the commission on direct payments plus interest and costs.
2 Aug 2022

PEMPETISYEN Wong How Kev for the Petitioner [Messrs Kev & Co.] Ahmad Syimir bin Suffian and Mohd Hazwan bin Hamidun for the Respondent [Messrs Rafaei & Co.]

Citation

WA-28NCC-37-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-37-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the Respondent established a prima facie bona fide dispute and there were pending civil proceedings filed before the petition raising the same issues (including a counterclaim and challenge to the adjudication decision), the winding up petition could not succeed and must be dismissed; adjudication decision was held to be temporary and not finally determinative pending the Writ Action.
17 Jun 2022

PEMPETISYEN DC TOWN SQUARE SDN BHD WINNING PARAGON SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-886-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-886-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Statutory demand was properly served at the respondent's registered address; the respondent failed to prove a bona fide dispute with particulars and evidence; existing judgments remain enforceable until set aside or stayed; therefore winding-up order was justified and granted.
31 May 2022

KWSL BUILDERS SDN BHD MUDAJAYA CORPORATION BERHAD

Citation

BA-24C-23-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24C-23-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court dismissed the applications to set aside the adjudication decisions and refused stays because CIPAA permits concurrent adjudication and court proceedings, the adjudicators acted within their statutory jurisdiction and observed natural justice, commencement of adjudication after the filing of court proceedings did not demonstrate mala fides or abuse, counterclaims and set-offs beyond the contract subject of the adjudication are not permitted in adjudication and cannot exceed the adjudicated claim, and the View Esteem thresholds for staying enforcement were not met; accordingly the enf…
8 Mar 2022

THIEN CHIET-CHAI RAYMOND MURPHY D CRUZ

Citation

WA-22NCC-363-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-363-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff met Order 14 prerequisites and produced unambiguous documentary evidence (three Letters of Guarantee and Notices of Termination) constituting admissions that the sums were loans repayable; Defendant failed to raise any genuine triable issue or valid defence and the purported counterclaim lacks basis against the Plaintiff because contractual reimbursement obligations fell on Skyline and were conditional on issuance of EC LOAs which were not fulfilled; the Reply to Defence to Counterclaim was filed without leave in breach of O.18 r.4 and is struck out; therefore summary judgment for P…
13 Oct 2021

Pembinaan Muthiah & Sons & 2 Lagi Swee Premix Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-12ANCC-73-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-73-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeals were allowed because the defendants raised triable issues—supported by the Ikram report and requiring expert and viva voce evidence—such that summary judgment was inappropriate and the counterclaim was plausible and not plainly unsustainable; the JKR guidance lacked demonstrated force of law and admissions of debt made before discovery of the deviation did not preclude the counterclaim or leave to defend.
19 Aug 2021

1. ) TIME LIZA INTERNATIONAL LTD 2. ) TIME MARINE SERVICES SDN BHD 3. ) HAMIDON BIN MD KHAYON 4. ) PUTERI NAZRAHTUL BINTI OMAR 5. ) AZMEL HAFIZ BIN AZIZ 6. ) OMAR BIN KHALID NAM CHEONG INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

WA-27NCC-55-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-27NCC-55-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff satisfied O.14 preliminary requirements and established a prima facie case; the guarantee documents contain express clauses creating separate, unconditional and independent liability (indemnity/principal debtor character) such that guarantors are directly liable and demand was not a prerequisite; defendants failed to raise pleaded, supported triable issues (issues were raised late or not in affidavit) so summary judgment was properly entered against 2nd–6th Defendants for the claimed amount with costs.