Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Summary judgment (o.14)

Legal area

Court

28 Aug 2025

Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja 1. ) MAYSNAN BIN HAMZAH (Berniaga Atas Nama dan Gaya MEDA ENGINEERS) 2. ) KAMSANI BIN ABDUL MAJID (Berniaga Atas Nama dan Gaya MEDA ENGINEERS) PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS 1. ) MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 2. ) MAYBA

Citation

JA-A72NCvC-4-01/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JA-A72NCvC-4-01/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 prerequisites and proved a prima facie case by means of statutory assessments (Form E/F), acknowledgements of service and an unequivocal letter from defendants admitting the outstanding sum; defendants failed to establish triable issues (their affidavits and unverified documents were afterthoughts or unsupported), therefore summary judgment was properly entered for the plaintiff.
9 May 2022

Kerajaan Malaysia 1. ) LIM CHYE THIAM (PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA LIM SOO CHOOI) 2. ) LIM SOO THAM (PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA LIM SOO CHOOI)

Citation

PA-21NCvC-13-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-21NCvC-13-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff satisfied the procedural prerequisites for summary judgment and produced evidence that notices were served (including defendants' admission in an appeal), the defendants failed to show any bona fide triable defence on affidavit, statutory provisions treat the certified outstanding tax as enforceable and bar challenges to the quantum in court; claims against persons described as administrators were competent because the statutory definition of executor/wasi includes administrators; therefore summary judgment was appropriate and granted with costs.
31 Mar 2022

BIOSKIN & LASER CENTRE SDN BHD TEH HUEY FEN

Citation

BL-A72NCvC-368-09/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BL-A72NCvC-368-09/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Summary judgment granted because plaintiff established a prima facie unjust enrichment claim: employer paid employee's EPF contributions which unjustly enriched the defendant; s.48(2) was inapplicable because the defendant was no longer employed so wage-deduction remedy was unavailable; defendant failed to raise any bona fide triable issues and the cause of action accrued on receipt of Borang E/payment in December 2020 so the claim is within limitation.
23 Apr 2021

FRONTPRISE INTERIOR SDN BHD ACOUSTRO CORPORATION SDN BHD

Citation

WA-12AC-10-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12AC-10-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appellant materially prevented issuance of progress payment certificates and had not pleaded or substantiated bona fide triable defences; Respondent therefore entitled to recover unpaid progress payment claims in court as if certificates had been issued, subject to contractual retention deduction; contractual default interest was not established so court awarded discretionary interest at 5% p.a.; summary judgment accordingly entered for Respondent in reduced amount.
20 Apr 2021

COSMOPOLITAN AVENUE SDN BHD 1. THIEN KIM KEONG 2. CHANG NYONG SIEW 3. LEE SENG HUAT 4. NG KEOK CHENG

Citation

BA-12ANCVC-201-12/2019 Di Dengar Bersama BA-12ANCVC-199-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12ANCVC-201-12/2019 Di Dengar Bersama BA-12ANCVC-199-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Deeds of Assignment, read in their entirety and having been executed as security pending issuance of title, operate by way of charge only so the plaintiffs retained locus standi to sue; further, delivery of vacant possession under the SPA occurred upon issuance of the architect's Certificate of Practical Completion and the vendor's notice (and the 14‑day deeming provision), not upon issuance of the Certificate of Completion and Compliance, therefore notices issued before the contractual due dates meant no LAD was payable; accordingly the plaintiffs' claim was frivolous and both the strike…
20 Sept 2019

TNO PROJECT MANAGEMENT SDN BHD OREN VENTURE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22C-49-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-49-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant failed to establish any bona fide triable issue: the Supplemental LOA was shown to be for loan facilitation and did not displace the original contract sum; the Plaintiff produced certified progress payment certificates and evidence of approvals and payments by SME Bank and the Architect/Consultant; insurance requirement was met; alleged failure to provide separate invoices did not constitute a triable defence. Accordingly summary judgment was proper for the unpaid certified sum less the conceded retention.

Malaysia Case Law

Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja 1. ) MAYSNAN BIN HAMZAH (Berniaga Atas Nama dan Gaya MEDA ENGINEERS) 2. ) KAMSANI BIN ABDUL MAJID (Berniaga Atas Nama dan Gaya MEDA ENGINEERS) PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS 1. ) MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 2. ) MAYBA

Kerajaan Malaysia 1. ) LIM CHYE THIAM (PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA LIM SOO CHOOI) 2. ) LIM SOO THAM (PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA LIM SOO CHOOI)

BIOSKIN & LASER CENTRE SDN BHD TEH HUEY FEN

FRONTPRISE INTERIOR SDN BHD ACOUSTRO CORPORATION SDN BHD

COSMOPOLITAN AVENUE SDN BHD 1. THIEN KIM KEONG 2. CHANG NYONG SIEW 3. LEE SENG HUAT 4. NG KEOK CHENG

TNO PROJECT MANAGEMENT SDN BHD OREN VENTURE SDN BHD