Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Delay in contempt proceedings

Legal area

Court

22 Jul 2022

PRESTAWIRA SDN. BHD. [Company No.: 403775-U] PRESTAWIRA SDN. BHD. [Company No.: 403775-U]

Citation

22-289-2009 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

22-289-2009 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Committal application dismissed because the judgment sought to be enforced did not specify a time for compliance and therefore could not sustain committal for 18 units, mandatory procedural requirements for enforcement by committal under Order 45 (including penal indorsement) were not satisfied, and the defendant failed to explain delay; court fixed one month for delivery of the 3 units admitted outstanding.
15 Dec 2021

ONE GASES SDN BHD MARINE FABRICATION TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCVC-593-10/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCVC-593-10/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Ex parte leave to apply for committal was set aside because (1) there was non‑compliance with Order 45 r 7—no evidence the consent judgment and Form 83 penal notice were personally served on the directors/officers sought to be committed; (2) the consent judgment was essentially a monetary judgment and therefore not appropriate to be enforced by committal against directors absent personal undertakings; and (3) there was undue delay in instituting committal proceedings, rendering the grant of leave inappropriate.