Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Void ab initio

Legal area

Court

23 Jun 2025

HOCK SENG TRADING & CONSTRUCTION HONGLER ENTERPRISE SDN BHD

Citation

W-02(C)(A)-980-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

C
Case number

W-02(C)(A)-980-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Because Hongler sued the business name alone rather than the sole proprietor in his personal name trading as the business, the correct party was not before the adjudicator; that defect deprived the adjudicator of jurisdiction and rendered the adjudication proceedings and the adjudication decision void ab initio; accordingly there was no valid AD to enforce and the High Court's dismissals were affirmed.
25 Apr 2024

SYED AMINUDIN BIN SYED ALI yang berniaga di bawah nama dan gaya AMZA WAWASAN ENTERPRISE PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN EKONOMI NEGERI PERLIS (PKENPs)

Citation

RA-22C-1-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

RA-22C-1-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found the plaintiff submitted a forged bank statement and acted with unclean hands; accordingly the SST and Contract were void ab initio, the plaintiff's claims were dismissed, and the defendant's counterclaim succeeded for declarations, repayment of interim payments of RM1,449,941.91 and additional costs of RM2,949,182.28; termination and remedial notices were lawful and costs of RM10,000 awarded to defendant.
15 Dec 2023

HOME TOWN STEAMBOAT HOLDING SDN. BHD. 1. ) PLATINUM PROSPERITY SDN. BHD. 2. ) LEE THAI CHUNG 3. ) WONG CHUN FAI

Citation

BB-A52-11-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BB-A52-11-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the Court found the 2016 and 2017 written agreements to be valid non-exclusive licence agreements (not franchise agreements), the defendants failed to prove fraudulent misrepresentation or that the agreements were void ab initio under the Franchise Act or Contract Act, and the plaintiff proved the outstanding contractual sums; accordingly plaintiff's claim was allowed and the defendant's counterclaim (including restitution of RM150,000) was dismissed.
15 Dec 2023

HOME TOWN STEAMBOAT HOLDING SDN. BHD. 1. ) PLATINUM PROSPERITY SDN. BHD. 2. ) LEE THAI CHUNG 3. ) WONG CHUN FAI

Citation

BB-A52-11-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BB-A52-11-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The licensing agreements dated 13.5.2016 and 21.9.2017 satisfy the statutory definition of a franchise under s.4 Franchise Act 1998; Plaintiff failed to register the franchise as required by s.6; that failure amounted to illegality rendering the agreements void ab initio; consequently Defendant First is entitled to restitution of the licence fee under s.66 Contracts Act 1950; the legal questions were suitable for final determination under Order 14A/Rule 33 because material facts were not in dispute.
24 Nov 2023

DAVID CHOONG JIN CHAI 1. ) TAN SRI DATO' SERI DR M MAHADEVAN A/L MAHALINGAM 2. ) Letchumanan A/l S. Rajoo

Citation

W-02(NCvC)(W)-2155-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

W-02(NCvC)(W)-2155-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The SOGAs were sham documents; contemporaneous bank remittance forms and bank statements established transfers from TSM to DC corresponding to SOGA tranche amounts and 'dividends' equated to interest; s.10OA MLA raised a presumption that TSM was carrying on a moneylending business which he failed to rebut; the transactions therefore constituted unlicensed moneylending contrary to s.5(1) and were void and unenforceable under s.15 MLA and void under Contracts Act s.24; appeals allowed and High Court decision set aside with declarations that the SOGAs are void under the MLA.
24 Nov 2023

DAVID CHOONG JIN CHAI TAN SRI DATO' SERI DR M MAHADEVAN A/L MAHALINGAM

Citation

W-02(NCvC)(W)-2156-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

W-02(NCvC)(W)-2156-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Banking records proved cash transfers from TSM to DC that corresponded to SOGA tranches and monthly "dividends" matched interest calculations; s10OA MLA presumption of moneylending arose and TSM failed to rebut it; the transactions therefore amounted to carrying on an unlicensed moneylending business and were illegal and unenforceable under s15 MLA and void under Contracts Act s24; accordingly the SOGAs are sham and void ab initio.
6 Apr 2022

ETIQA GENERAL TAKAFUL BERHAD 1. ) WAKIL DIRI KEPADA FATIMAH BTE ADAM 2. ) MAHAT BIN PINDEK 3. ) R. KALAIVANI A/P RAJOO 4. ) DAARSHINI PRIYA A/P MANIAM

Citation

WA-24NCC-346-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-346-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the named insured had died before the purported renewals, no valid contract could be formed in her name; Schedule 9 and s129 FSA 2013 regulate voidability of existing consumer insurance contracts and do not apply where a contract is void ab initio for lack of capacity; accordingly the renewed policies in the deceased's name were void ab initio, declarations were granted and premiums ordered refunded.
18 Feb 2022

BERJAYA SOMPO INSURANS BERHAD 1. ) SHAMISHA HOLIDAY & TRAVEL SDN. BHD. 2. ) SYAAIDIN BIN ISHAK 3. ) KHASIMI BIN HANAPI

Citation

WA-24NCC-81-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-81-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The policy was declared void ab initio because it was entered into after the 1st Defendant had been wound up and there was no evidence the liquidator authorised the transaction; the undisputed material misrepresentations about the insured vehicle further justified avoidance under s96(3) RTA and Schedule 9 FSA, entitling the insurer to declaratory relief.
17 Jun 2021

KAISAR MAXIM SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 978433-P) CHEAH POH HIN (NRIC NO.: 780218-07-6017)

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-14-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-14-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Although the Sale and Purchase Agreement breached the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations by providing a 54-month delivery period and the Controller's extension was ultra vires, the statutory scheme does not show an intention to render the entire SPA void ab initio; only the unlawful time provision (clause 25) is invalid and must conform to the 36-month period under Schedule H. The Sessions Court's order voiding the entire agreement was an error of law and is set aside.
19 Oct 2020

MOHD KHAIRULDI BIN AB HALIM CIMB ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD

Citation

WA-12AM-3-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12AM-3-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The counterclaim was clearly unsustainable as a matter of law because the financier was not obliged to ensure customs duties were paid or to guarantee quiet possession/good title; therefore the counterclaim was frivolous/vexatious and properly struck out under O.18 r.19 KKM 2012.