Clause 36 of the contract allowing termination for national interest does not violate Section 29 of the Contracts Act 1950, as it does not absolutely restrict the Plaintiff's rights.

JUDGMENT

Roz Mawar Rozain JC:

The Plaintiff's Claim

[1] 'Every business has its ups and downs' - a term often quoted in the commercial world. In the beginning the Plaintiff seemed confident with the business of providing rental of camps and infrastructure to the Defendant for national service training. Still, in the end, it led to the Plaintiff's business to receivership. The Plaintiff claims that due to the purported wrongful termination by the Defendant of their contract, the Plaintiff suffered substantial losses that eventually led to its winding up. The Defendant at the other side, with complete reliance on cl 36 of their contract, had ended all contractual relations and dealings with the Plaintiff following the announcement on 13 August 2018 that confirmed to the nation the national service training was to be disbanded. Aside from seeking this Court 's declaration that cl 36 was in breach of the Federal Constitution and the Contracts Act 1950 , the Plaintiff also claims for the following:

(a) RM3,061,000.00 as damages for the cost of construction and improving the camp for Program Latihan Khidmat Negara (PLKN);

(b) RM5,200,939.55 for the balance of the contract sum for the rental of infrastructure from October 2018 to December 2020;

(c) RM2,244,275.00 as the amount underpaid for the rental of infrastructure and services from 2014 to 2015;

(d) RM702,282.00 as the amount underpaid for the infrastructure from 2017 to 2018;

(e) RM1,161 ,464.81 as the 20% loss of profits because of the underpayment for the catering services from 2014 to 2018;

(f) RM2,435,400 as the 20% loss of profits from the total sum that ought to be received from April 2018 to 2020;

(g) General Damages;

(h) Exemplary Damages;

(i) Aggravated Damages;

(j) Interests of 5%; and

(k) Costs.

[2] For such a hefty sum and for claims that seemed to have been due years before the termination, this Court assessed the evidence of this case adduced through three witnesses at full trial. The Plaintiff called its director while for the Defendant the Director General of Jabatan Latihan Khidmat Negara (JLKN) at the material time and the Secretary General from the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) took the stand.

[3] Twenty-one years ago the government on 28 May 2003 approved the implementation of a national service known as PLKN. Pursuant thereto, laws were passed, and a government department was established on 16 February 2004 - JLKN to help plan, execute, implement, and assess PLKN. The national service was officially launched on 16 February 2004 with the objectives of increasing patriotism in the younger generation, to foster racial integration on a national level amongst other positive values and principles.

[4] Through the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF), the government issued a letter of intent to the Plaintiff on 12 July 2005. The Defendant approved the Plaintiff's participation of PLKN as a camp operator. It was with conditions that included the requirement that the land upon the camp was to be free from all encumbrances and third parties' interests. The land must be able to accommodate all buildings, infrastructure and elements for land and air training. The Plaintiff was to adhere to the Schedule of Compliance and the number of trainees and trainers that were to be placed in the Plaintiff's camp would range from 300-400 people. The contract to rent the camp, infrastructure and facilities was four years with the first intake in 2006. The daily rate was RM25.00 per person for the infrastructure and facilities and RM16.00 for catering services. The Plaintiff had accepted this on 15 July 2005.

[5] What followed was the Letter of Acceptance dated 20 September 2005. It confirmed that the Plaintiff's appointment as a camp operator to provide the infrastructure and facilities for the PLKN at a rental rate of RM41.00 per day per person based on 360 participants for 82 days three sessions annually for four years with the contract sum of RM14,523,840.00. A contract was then entered between the pa