Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Hire purchase agreement

Legal area

Court

22 Aug 2025

FGV PRODATA SYSTEMS SENDIRIAN BERHAD 1. ) NEC CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD 2. ) NEC CAPITAL SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD PIHAK KETIGA Shinryu Co Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-22NCC-139-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-139-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found Shinryu delivered the Hardware to Hualang at Maju Intan on 14.4.2021; the 1st Defendant's representations about delivery were true; the Plaintiff's CEO personally verified delivery (email 30.6.2021) and the Plaintiff acted on those verifications; the Plaintiff is estopped by its contemporaneous conduct and delay from denying delivery; therefore claims for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, failure of consideration and voiding the HPA fail; the HPA and bank guarantee remain valid; 2nd Defendant's counterclaim lacked evidential proof of l…
22 Aug 2025

FGV PRODATA SYSTEMS SENDIRIAN BERHAD 1. ) NEC CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD 2. ) NEC CAPITAL SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD PIHAK KETIGA Shinryu Co Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-22NCC-139-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-139-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found delivery occurred to the contractual recipient Hualang at the Maju Intan Plant as evidenced by the Shinryu delivery order signed and stamped by Hualang, the plaintiff's own contemporaneous packing list/checklist/certificate of completion and, critically, the plaintiff CEO's email confirming personal verification; therefore representations were not false, plaintiff did not rely on false representations, plaintiff is estopped by its conduct and delay, the misrepresentation claims fail, the HPA remains valid, the 2nd Defendant's counterclaim lacked…
11 Mar 2025

Goldbell Capital Sdn Bhd 1. ) ST Healthcare Group Sdn Bhd 2. ) Safarudin Bin Tambi

Citation

BA-22NCC-45-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCC-45-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment because the HPA and Guarantee were valid and enforceable, Plaintiff proved delivery and default, D2 was liable as guarantor and principal debtor independent of D1's enforceability, and Defendants failed to plead or establish triable issues; the proposed amendment was irrelevant, constituted a new defence concerning a third party assignment not binding on Plaintiff, was late and tactical, and thus must be dismissed. Clause 15.3 permitted recovery of unpaid balance where Plaintiff could not resume possession.
2 Mar 2022

BMW CREDIT (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD 1. ) LEARSIM SDN BHD 2. ) SAYYID SHAH BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

WA-12ANCC-4-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-4-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the defendants breached express obligations in the hire purchase agreement by allowing the vehicle to be sold/transfered and failed to dispute the outstanding amount, therefore they raised no triable issue; consequently summary judgment was appropriate and the appeal was allowed.
16 Jul 2021

HITACHI CAPITAL MALAYSIA SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 101631-U) 1. TMT INDUSTRY SDN BHD [NO. SYARIKAT: 200601030165 (749923-K)] 2. MO SHU-HSIEN (CHINA PASSPORT: 135170353/315785307) 3. MOU, YU-HUI (CHINA PASSPORT: 303146435) 4. CHAN, HSUN-WEI (CH

Citation

WA-22NCC-625-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-625-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the defendants admitted execution of the hire purchase agreements and guarantees and receipt of equipment but failed to plead or particularise any substantive defence, raised new unparticularised allegations only in affidavit (afterthoughts), and because the contract contained conclusive clauses and the Plaintiff produced a Certificate of Indebtedness showing no manifest error, the court found no triable issue and struck out the Statement of Defence and entered judgment for the Plaintiff.
18 Sept 2020

SU HOCK GUAN 1. AXA AFFIN GENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD 2. RHB BANK BERHAD

Citation

WA-12ANCC-29-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-29-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiff's cause of action against the 2nd defendant accrued on 15 June 2012 when the insurer's repudiation letter was received and disclosed the material facts; therefore the claim amended to add the 2nd defendant on 25 November 2019 was outside the six‑year limitation and Order 20 r5 does not permit relation back to circumvent the limitation, so the appeal is dismissed.

Malaysia Case Law

FGV PRODATA SYSTEMS SENDIRIAN BERHAD 1. ) NEC CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD 2. ) NEC CAPITAL SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD PIHAK KETIGA Shinryu Co Sdn Bhd

FGV PRODATA SYSTEMS SENDIRIAN BERHAD 1. ) NEC CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD 2. ) NEC CAPITAL SOLUTIONS MALAYSIA SENDIRIAN BERHAD PIHAK KETIGA Shinryu Co Sdn Bhd

Goldbell Capital Sdn Bhd 1. ) ST Healthcare Group Sdn Bhd 2. ) Safarudin Bin Tambi

BMW CREDIT (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD 1. ) LEARSIM SDN BHD 2. ) SAYYID SHAH BIN ABDULLAH

HITACHI CAPITAL MALAYSIA SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 101631-U) 1. TMT INDUSTRY SDN BHD [NO. SYARIKAT: 200601030165 (749923-K)] 2. MO SHU-HSIEN (CHINA PASSPORT: 135170353/315785307) 3. MOU, YU-HUI (CHINA PASSPORT: 303146435) 4. CHAN, HSUN-WEI (CH

SU HOCK GUAN 1. AXA AFFIN GENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD 2. RHB BANK BERHAD