Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Counterclaim for losses

Legal area

Court

18 Jan 2023

MUTIARA SMART SDN BHD OFISGATE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-429-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-429-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The three advances of RM1,750,000 were loans/advances to the Defendant (and in any event treated by the SSA as advances/loans repayable by the Company); Plaintiff proved entitlement to repayment plus agreed 5% profit (RM87,500) totalling RM1,837,500; Defendant’s counterclaim fails because Defendant is not party to the SSA and Clause 3.2 of the SA vests discretion in Plaintiff regarding funding; counterclaim dismissed and costs awarded to Plaintiff.
5 Jul 2022

Jayaprakash Mathavan Premium Oils & Fats Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-561-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-561-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Employment letter and Annexure required payment of accrued LSBS up to withdrawal date; GAHL Remuneration Committee recommendation and Board resolution of 27.5.2015 constituted approval of bonus payable to plaintiff; defendant failed to prove alleged breaches of fidelity or fiduciary duty; therefore plaintiff entitled to RM1,325,000 (LSBS) and RM850,000 (bonus); defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
26 May 2022

AIM ADVANCE SDN. BHD. 1. ) Runningman Evolution Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) Runningman Instant Delivery Sdn. Bhd. 3. ) Lee Hao Ting 4. ) Lin Wai Jet 5. ) Andrew Chee Lamn Kwan 6. ) Tan Wei Yong

Citation

WA-12ANCvC-41-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCvC-41-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the issues raised could not be resolved on affidavits alone under Order 14A/33 because material factual disputes exist (notably whether the agreements meet the statutory criteria in Section 4(a)–(d) of the Franchise Act 1998 and whether there was requisite continuous control). The applicant failed to show the four statutory elements were satisfied on the evidence before the court; therefore the matter must proceed to full trial with witness testimony. The interlocutory application/appeal was dismissed and the Sessions Court decision was upheld.
6 May 2021

1.Salimah binti Osman [No. K/P: 660125-11-5340] 2. Infiniti Communication Sdn Bhd [No. Sykt: 299414-X] 1. Zafrol Rizal bin Mat [No. K/P: 721123-14-5091] 2. Shahrol Farid bin Mat [No. K/P: 810728-08-5049]

Citation

12BNCVC-45-06-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

12BNCVC-45-06-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The oral share sale agreement was concluded between the plaintiffs and the first defendant; due diligence and regulatory issues were not resolved and thus the defendants were not entitled to demand the balance or forfeit the deposits; the sessions judge correctly found breach by the defendant in seeking payment and correctly dismissed the counterclaim for lack of evidence, and her decision is affirmed on appeal.

Malaysia Case Law

MUTIARA SMART SDN BHD OFISGATE SDN BHD

Jayaprakash Mathavan Premium Oils & Fats Sdn. Bhd.

AIM ADVANCE SDN. BHD. 1. ) Runningman Evolution Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) Runningman Instant Delivery Sdn. Bhd. 3. ) Lee Hao Ting 4. ) Lin Wai Jet 5. ) Andrew Chee Lamn Kwan 6. ) Tan Wei Yong

1.Salimah binti Osman [No. K/P: 660125-11-5340] 2. Infiniti Communication Sdn Bhd [No. Sykt: 299414-X] 1. Zafrol Rizal bin Mat [No. K/P: 721123-14-5091] 2. Shahrol Farid bin Mat [No. K/P: 810728-08-5049]