Claims for goods sold and delivered require detailed particulars of each transaction; insufficient details result in dismissal of the claim.

Introduction

[1] This is an action by the Plaintiff ("P") against the 1st Defendant ("D1") for goods sold and delivered. D1 in turn made a counterclaim against P. After a full trial, I dismissed P's claim. I allowed D1's counterclaim. Here are the grounds of my judgment.

The Trial

[2] The trial took 1 day on 20 March 2023. The witnesses who testified at the trial were:

Background Facts

[3] P's claim is essentially for amounts outstanding in respect of goods sold and delivered. The goods in question here is liquefied petroleum gas ("LPG"). The LPG was used by D1 for its production of latex / rubber gloves at its factory in Kamunting, Perak.

[4] P alleges that D1 is still in debt for an amount of RM1,504,593.10, being the outstanding sum for the LPG sold and delivered from 12 April 2021 till November 2021. P claims for the following:

(a) Debt amounting to RM1,504,593.10;

(b) Interest on the aforesaid debt amounting to RM99,375.63;

(c) Damages for early termination amounting to RM472,800; and

(d) Loss for delivery costs of RM16,706.10.

[5] The 2nd to the 4th Defendants are directors of P. Upon their application made under O 18 r 19(1) of the Rules of Court 2012vide encl 8, by consent this action against them was struck out by an order of Court dated 17 October 2022. Thus, leaving only D1 as the defendant in the instant suit.

[6] It is my finding that P has failed to prove its claim against D1 on a balance of probabilities. Here are my reasons.

Tripartite Agreement Dated 1 March 2021

[7] The contract which governs the transactions between the parties is a Tripartite Agreement dated 1 March 2021 ("Tri-Partite Agreement"). The Tri-partite Agreement was entered into between NGC Energy Sdn Bhd ("NGC"), P and D1.

[8] The recitals of the Tri-Partite Agreement reads:

"(A) The Seller [ie NGC] is in the business of supplying liquefied petroleum gas (hereinafter referred to as the "Product(s)");

(B) The Distributor [ie P] wishes to purchase the Product from the Seller and the Seller wishes to supply the Products to the Distributor on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement;

(C) The Product shall be delivered by the Seller to the Customer [ie D1] and shall be stored in Seller's Strorage Equipment installed at the Customer's Premises as particularised at Clause (5) below."

[9] In the Tri-Partite Agreement,:

(a) NGC is the "Seller" of the LPG;

(b) P is the "Distributor" of the LPG; and

(c) D1 is the "Customer" who utilises the LPG.

[10] Under the Tri-Partite Agreement, P agreed to purchase LPG from NGC. The LPG is to be delivered by NGC directly to D1 at its factory in Kamunting, Perak. This is stipulated in cl 5(1) of the Tri-Partite Agreement which reads:

"(1) The Seller [ie NGC] shall deliver the Product to the Customer [ie D1] and the Customer shall receive the product at the Customer's premises at Lot 7806, Jalan Perusahaan 1, Kawasan Perindustrian Kamunting, 34600 Kamunting, Perak".

The 1st Defendant Is Not Liable