Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Goods sold and delivered

Legal area

Court

10 Apr 2026

SUNSTAR RESOURCES ENTERPRISE NAZRI TILES GALLERY & HARDWARE SDN. BHD.

Citation

AJ-A72NCC-60-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AJ-A72NCC-60-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Plaintif satisfied Order 14 prerequisites and established a prima facie case by contemporaneous documents (delivery orders, invoices, statements) and conduct; Defendan failed to produce evidence of any bona fide triable issue or third‑party transaction; burden therefore shifted to Defendan and summary judgment was properly entered for the plaintiff.
12 Feb 2026

1. ) VERTEX CENTRAL INDUSTRIES SDN. BHD. 2. ) MOHD ALI AMIN BIN AB LATIF 3. ) MOHD AZKARI MUNIF BIN AB LATIF POSIM MARKETING SDN. BHD.

Citation

DA-12ANCC-3-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-12ANCC-3-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the writ and statement of claim were sent by prepaid registered post to addresses agreed in the parties' contracts, and the contracts contained express deeming language that service is effective 'notwithstanding any proof to the contrary', the appellants were estopped from denying service despite postal tracking remarks; further, their admissions and part payments constituted an acknowledgment of debt that barred their defence on the merits. The Sessions Court's refusal to set aside the default judgment was therefore correct and is affirmed.
19 Jan 2026

ALPHA POLYMER SDN BHD 1. ) GYH MANUFACTURING SDN BHD 2. ) ECOHOUSE VENTURE SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCC-117-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCC-117-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Claim dismissed because the Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof: the Statement of Claim lacked material particulars, originals or satisfactory authentication for many delivery orders were not produced, there were unexplained discrepancies and identical invoices from a related company raising double‑recovery risk, and no sufficient evidence established contractual liability of the 2nd Defendant.
27 Nov 2025

ENVILAB SDN BHD GIIB RUBBER COMPOUND SDN BHD

Citation

WA-B52NCC-1306-05/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52NCC-1306-05/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Invoices and delivery notes expressly stating 1.5% per month constitute part of the written contract; defendant had knowledge and did not object at material times and is estopped from denying the term; therefore there is no triable issue on principal or interest and summary judgment is warranted for the plaintiff with costs.
13 Nov 2025

PROACTIVE AHUTTERS SDN. BHD. WE EXCELLENT ALUMINIUM & GLASS SDN. BHD.

Citation

JA-A52NCC-383-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-A52NCC-383-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court found the plaintiff established the debt by undisputed quotations, invoices and account statements which the defendant received and did not timely dispute, thereby creating an account-stated estoppel; the defendant failed to prove any legitimate set-off or counterclaim (including defective works or third-party costs) and failed to produce supporting notices or receipts; retention provisions relied on by defendant were inapplicable because the relevant work orders were not part of the contractual documents before the court; accordingly the plaintiff's claim was allowed and the defend…
29 Sept 2025

MICROTRONICS TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD TOPLAND TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-23-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-23-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court lawfully found on the balance of probabilities that the plaintiff proved sale and delivery of the ICs and the defendant failed to prove ownership, theft, fraud or conspiracy with requisite particulars and evidence; appellate intervention was therefore unjustified and the appeal is dismissed.
25 Jul 2025

Tangshan New Resource Ecological Sci and Tech Co., Ltd ROCKWILLS TRUSTEE BERHAD

Citation

WA-22NCvC-536-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-536-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the deceased and plaintiff treated the USD 80,000 telegraphic transfer of 2.9.2016 as full and final settlement as evidenced by contemporaneous ledger entries and conduct; plaintiff failed to prove delivery and the alleged balance debt on the balance of probabilities; invoices addressed to third parties did not bind the deceased; therefore the claim for USD 416,359 was extinguished and dismissed.
10 Mar 2025

DK WORLD RESOURCES (M) SDN BHD RUBBERFLEX SDN BHD

Citation

WA-A52-63-06/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-A52-63-06/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff proved a running account and outstanding debt by production of PO, DO (acknowledged by defendant) and invoices; defendant failed to raise timely objections and was estopped from relying on late complaints; defendant failed to prove defects, causation or quantified losses and produced no competent expert or documentary proof; no confidentiality agreement existed and published material did not disclose trade secrets. Judgment for plaintiff for RM212,186.50 with interest and costs; defendant's counterclaim dismissed with costs.
15 Oct 2024

SYABAS AUTO SERVICE SDN. BHD. CSE TRUCKING SDN. BHD.

Citation

JA-A52NCC-245-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-A52NCC-245-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Documentary evidence comprising repair orders, jobsheets, tax invoices, account statements and emails established delivery and acceptance and a clear outstanding balance; defendant made no timely protest to create a bona fide dispute and is estopped by account-stated; defects in some documents were unpleaded and amounted to afterthoughts; limitation defence was not pleaded; therefore plaintiff proved the debt and is entitled to judgment and costs.
11 Oct 2024

TSA INDUSTRIES SDN. BHD. 1. ) JY ENGINEERING & MARKETING SDN. BHD. 2. ) NG JIAN YUAN

Citation

MA-A72NCC-105-03/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

MA-A72NCC-105-03/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The application under Order 27 r.3 was dismissed because the documents relied upon did not contain clear, unequivocal and unambiguous admissions of liability and because there was a genuine dispute as to the quantum which requires full trial and evidence; therefore summary judgment could not be granted.