Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fundamental breach

Legal area

Court

21 Nov 2025

NATASHA BEVERLY DENTAL SDN. BHD DR. JOYCE FONG NI TIENG

Citation

WA-A72NCvC-5201-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

WA-A72NCvC-5201-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Court found plaintiff through its representative (SP1) breached the implied fundamental term to preserve trust and confidence, permitting defendant to terminate employment by constructive dismissal; late commission payments were not a fundamental breach; plaintiff waived/was estopped from claiming liquidated damages by accepting early release/notice arrangements via its managing director; consequence: plaintiff's claim for RM88,000 dismissed and defendant's counterclaim allowed in part (repayment for shares and unpaid commission awarded; salary claim barred by earlier proceedings).
6 Jan 2025

MERANTI MARSHAL SDN BHD 1. ) MOHD KUSHAIRI BIN KAMISAN 2. ) EMF ENERGY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22C-46-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-46-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the RM800,000 constituted a recoverable commission paid to the First Defendant and failed to prove any unlawful conspiracy; moreover Plaintiff materially breached fundamental contractual obligations (insufficient progress, suspension of works) thereby justifying the valid termination by the Second Defendant dated 24.02.2021; accordingly all claims are dismissed and costs awarded against Plaintiff.
17 Dec 2024

Paragon Paper & Plywood Sdn. Bhd. Advance Boilers Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

WA-22NCvC-498-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-498-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The System failed to perform to the contractual specification (producing only c.220 eKW vs contractual 325 eKW); contemporaneous documents and admissions established defect; the defect deprived Plaintiff of substantial benefit and was a fundamental breach entitling Plaintiff to rescind the contract; consequentially Plaintiff was entitled to restitution of part payments of RM2,690,280, dismantling and removal of equipment at Defendant's cost, interest at 5% p.a. from date of order until full settlement, and costs; Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
31 Mar 2023

LADANG VENU (M) SDN. BHD. D Pristine Medini Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-22NCvC-187-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-187-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court dismissed the defendant's striking out application because the plaintiff's pleaded case raises reasonable triable issues of fact and law that are not plainly or obviously unsustainable; the matters require full trial and witness evidence rather than summary dismissal under Order 18 r 19; accordingly the plaintiff has shown a cause of action and the interlocutory application must fail.
14 Mar 2023

Rizal Bina 1. ) Ketua Pengarah Kerja Raya Malaysia 2. ) Jabatan Kerja Raya Malaysia 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

AA-21NCvC-5-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-21NCvC-5-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The termination was valid because the plaintiff committed a fundamental breach by failing to proceed regularly and diligently as required by Clause 51.1(a)(iii); the NUTPKs complied with contractual requirements and the termination notice of 24/7/2015 was effective. Defendants were entitled to recover completion costs subject to deductions for sums due to the plaintiff; after contractual set-offs and adjustments (including deduction of bank guarantee and disallowance of GST and certain tender supervision costs), the net payable by defendants to plaintiff was RM270,017.65. Plaintiff's substant…
7 Jul 2022

1. ) LAU SENG YEE 2. ) CHEE LEE FAN VENUS ASSETS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCvC-359-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-359-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court refused summary striking out because the defendant failed to show the plaintiffs' claim was plainly and obviously unsustainable; credible triable issues exist as to whether repeated post-CCC water leaks rendered the Parcel unfit and amounted to a fundamental breach, and those issues require full trial and viva voce evidence; accordingly the O.18 r.19 application is dismissed with costs.
20 Feb 2022

LADANG SUNGAI LEPAR SDN BHD 1. ) PERTUBUHAN KEBAJIKAN ISLAM MALAYSIA (PERKIM) BAHAGIAN NEGERI KELANTAN 2. ) AHMAD BIN YAKOB

Citation

DA-22NCvC-45-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCvC-45-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant was not the registered owner and beneficial owner of PT 4709 at the time of the Development Agreement and thereby made a misrepresentation that induced Plaintiff to enter the contract and expend substantial sums; Defendant's inability to deliver the promised rights constituted a fundamental breach under s40 Contracts Act 1950, entitling Plaintiff to rescind and recover special and general damages, interest and costs.
12 Nov 2019

Redha Resources Sdn Bhd 1. Majlis Agama Islam Selangor 2. Kolej Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Selangor Sdn Bhd 3. Bank Muamalat Malaysia Bhd

Citation

B-01(NCVC)(W)-51-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCVC
Case number

B-01(NCVC)(W)-51-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Plaintiffs were not entitled to terminate the concession agreement because the alleged breaches (commencing works pending plan endorsement and delay in CCC) were not fundamental: plaintiffs knew of or acquiesced in the conduct, permitted occupation and received benefit, and CCC was obtained before trial; termination was therefore unlawful and appellant is entitled to restitutionary relief assessed by market value of the buildings (less sums already paid) plus arrears of rental and damages for losses naturally resulting from the breach; assessment and payment directions to be made by the trial…
21 Mar 2019

RICHALLENGE CORPORATION SDN BHD POTECK ENTERPRISE SDN BHD

Citation

S-02(NCvC)(W)- 2545-12/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

S-02(NCvC)(W)- 2545-12/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the High Court was plainly wrong: the Defendant's purported termination was unlawful because the SCA's express termination regime (clauses 10 and 11.3) was not complied with, the Main Contract was not terminated, requisite notices and cure opportunities were not shown, and the Plaintiff had partially performed so section 40 CA did not justify repudiation; appeal allowed, High Court judgment set aside, judgment entered for Appellant, matter remitted for assessment of damages and costs awarded to Appellant.
M-CONCEPT SDN BHD V. BERJAYA TIMES SQUARE SDN BHD

Citation

M-CONCEPT SDN BHD V. BERJAYA TIMES SQUARE SDN BHD
Court

Malaysian court

The defendant's failure to deliver vacant possession for approximately four years and four months where time was essential amounted to a fundamental breach under s.56(1) of the Contracts Act 1950, entitling the plaintiff to rescind; entitlement to liquidated damages did not bar rescission; plaintiff was not estopped or deemed to have waived the right to rescind, and defendant's inequitable conduct precluded equitable defences.