Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Progress claims

Legal area

Court

11 Sept 2025

TOSHIBA Elevator (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd TANJUNG TERAS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-A52NCvC-33-01/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-A52NCvC-33-01/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the court found Plaintiff completed the contracted works and proved variation works of RM53,432.00; Defendant failed to prove any agreement by Plaintiff to reduce the contract price and Defendant's 2018 acknowledgment revived the limitation period; accordingly Plaintiff was entitled to the unpaid balance of RM178,963.70 and the claim was not time-barred.
14 Feb 2025

NZ BINA SDN BHD 1. ) REAPLITE INDUSTRY SDN BHD 2. ) OCBC BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD PIHAK TERKILAN Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

JA-22NCvC-275-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-275-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found Plaintiff's termination of the sub‑contract unlawful because cogent evidence showed delays were caused by lack of possession, unfinished utility works and JKR payment delays, not the 1st Defendant; progress claims Nos.35‑37 were submitted and acknowledged by Plaintiff; therefore Plaintiff's claim for LAD was dismissed and 1st Defendant entitled to return of performance bond and unpaid progress claims.
24 Oct 2024

MPTS CONTRUCTION SDN BHD CHUW YIH YANN

Citation

DA-A72NCvC-160-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DA-A72NCvC-160-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

DA-A72NCvC-160-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
2 Oct 2023

TANG HANG TOW FIXUS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

Citation

WA-12BC-4-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BC-4-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appellate court held there was ample trial evidence that the Appellant delayed works, acknowledged defects at joint inspections, surrendered the project, and agreed to re‑assessment; LOA clauses empowered Respondent to reassess, deduct and set off amounts; credibility findings of trial judge were entitled to deference; therefore Progress Claim Nos.4 and 5 were not payable, the Respondent's counterclaim and assessed amounts and retention were properly awarded, and the appeal must be dismissed.
19 Apr 2023

C.E.L CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD CHUAH KIM CHYE

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-5-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-5-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found no appealable error in the Sessions Court's factual findings that the respondent had submitted detailed progress claims which the appellant did not dispute, that a Certificate of Fitness was issued (indicating absence of defects), and that the appellant failed to produce cogent independent evidence to support its counterclaim; accordingly the Sessions Court's award of RM510,700.93 with interest and costs was upheld and the counterclaim was dismissed.
19 Nov 2021

FZA UTAMA SDN. BHD. BPH BINA SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-22C-113-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-113-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found Clause 2.4 did not create a back-to-back/pay-when-paid obligation to KPKT/Intraxius; factual evidence showed payments were treated on a stand-alone basis by Defendant; Plaintiff proved completion and entitlement to Progress Claims Nos.1-6 (RM3,665,026.82), Progress Claim No.7 (RM1,609,087.42) and Earthworks (RM420,000.00) with interest; Defendant failed to prove overpayment or loss/aggravated damages, so counterclaim dismissed.

Malaysia Case Law

TOSHIBA Elevator (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd TANJUNG TERAS SDN BHD

NZ BINA SDN BHD 1. ) REAPLITE INDUSTRY SDN BHD 2. ) OCBC BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD PIHAK TERKILAN Kerajaan Malaysia

MPTS CONTRUCTION SDN BHD CHUW YIH YANN

TANG HANG TOW FIXUS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

C.E.L CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD CHUAH KIM CHYE

FZA UTAMA SDN. BHD. BPH BINA SDN. BHD.