SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 MarsdenLR 159

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
WORLDWIDE PLATINUM RECORDS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
TAN SEW CHENG – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: BA-22NCVC-38-01-2022]



Petitioner Advocates:Lim Choon Kim,Chin Yan Leng,David Yii Hee Kiet ,Respondent Advocate: Walter Pereira,Annie Gomez

The plaintiff bears the burden of proof in asserting claims, including establishing the validity of agreements and compliance with laws governing the transaction.

Headnote:The plaintiff claimed Euro 1 million for breach of undertakings by the defendant, asserting misrepresentation in securing a loan from Noble Mettle. The defendant argued that the transaction was illegal under Malaysian law and that the plaintiff's claims lacked a solid basis. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove its case, primarily due to a lack of evidence, leading to the dismissal of the claim. 'The plaintiff has failed to satisfy the original burden of introducing evidence to prove her case on the balance of probabilities. In consequence, it is not necessary for the Court to consider the question of whether the defendant has established her defence.'

Table of Content
1. plaintiff's claim based on defendant's undertakings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. key issues raised for trial. (Para 8)
3. legal principles concerning burden of proof. (Para 18 , 21)
4. defendant's submission of no case to answer. (Para 22 , 24 , 25)
5. conclusion of the court dismissing the claim. (Para 28)
Rozi Bainon JC:

Introduction

[1] This is a trial of a suit for the Plaintiff's claim for Euro 1 million based on the Defendant's breach of undertakings.

[2] This case was transferred from Penang High Court to Shah Alam High Court vide the Court's Order dated 10 January 2022.

[3] This suit proceeded to trial on 1 February 2023. In the list of Plaintiff's witnesses, the Plaintiff is calling its sole witness, Chua Yu Sheng. In the list of Defendant's witnesses, there are 4 witnesses (the Defendant herself, the Chairman of Noble Mettle LCC, the lawyer and the Bank Executive Officer) to give evidence.

[4] The Defendant elected not to call any witness and submitted no case to answer. The trial was completed on the same day.

[5] Parties concurrently filed their written closing submissions followed by their written submissions in reply.

The Summary Of The Plaintiff's Case (Enclosure 152)

[6] The summary of the Plaintiff's case is reproduced as follows:

Pada segala masa yang material, Defendan telah menampilkan dirinya sebagai wakil dan/atau agen di Malaysia dengan satu syarikat korporat dari AmerikaSyarikat yang dikenali sebagai Noble Mettle Group melalui Noble Mettle, LLCdan/atau afiliasi dan/atau rakan kongsi yang berkaitan (selepas daripada ini dipanggil "Noble Mettle") melalui suatu Perlantikan Perwakilan Noble Mettle ["Noble Mettle Representative Appointment"] bertarikh 15 November 2016.

Defendan merepresentasikan bahawa suatu pinjaman berupa Euro/€ 102 juta bolehdiluluskan kepada Plaintif dengan syarat jumlah Euro/€ 1 juta perlu dibayar kepadaNoble Mettle dan/atau Defendan terlebih dahulu sebagai bayaran fi Pentadbiran dan due diligence. Pembayaran Euro/€ 1 juta tersebut yang dapat dikembalikan sekiranya pinjaman tidak diluluskan dan/atau dilepaskan kepada Plaintif.

Pada 30 December 2016 jumlah sebanyak Euro/€ 100,000.00 melalui pemindahan wiretransfer telah dibuat kepada Noble Mettle dan jumlah Euro/€ 900,000.00 dibuat dan/atau dibayar kepada Defendan sebagai wakil korporat dan/atau agen dan/atau orang yang berhubung dengan Noble Mettle menurut Tawaran Pinjaman yang ditandatangani.

Defendan menerima dan/atau mengambil jumlah sebanyak Euro/€ 900,000.00 dari Plaintif dengan memberi kepada Plaintif suatu Acknowledgment of Receipt andUndertaking bertarikh 30 December 2016.

Selepas itu pembayaran Euro/€ 1 juta sebagai fi pentabiran dan due diligence, Plaintif tidak menerima apa-apa pinjaman dari Noble Mettle seperti yang dijanjikan dan direprentasikan oleh Defendan sebagai wakil dan/atau agen Noble Mettle kepada Plaintif.

Beberapa Notis Tuntutan telah dikeluarkan oleh Plaintif kepada Defendan.

Pada masa yang material pada 23 October 2017 Defendan telah memberi satu surat akujanji dan indemniti kepada Plaintif di mana Defendan mengakujanji akan-membayar balik kesemua wang Plaintif yang berjumlah Euro/€ 1 juta.

Malahan Defendan memohon maaf atas kesilapannya dan/atau kesalahannya dan berjanji untuk mengembalikan wang Plaintif kepada Plaintif.

Defendan juga menyatakan dengan jelas bahawa beliau tidak akan membela diri dalam apa-apa tindakan sekiranya ada terhadap beliau oleh pihak Plaintif.

Defendan sebenarnya juga bersetuju untuk suatu Penghakiman Persetujuan menurut surat akujanji dan indemniti bertarikh 23 October 2017 tersebut.

Pada kesemua masa yang material semasa penerimaan dan pembayaran wang sebanyak Euro/€ 1 juta dari Plaintif, tiada isu-isu illegality dan apa-apa isu berkenaan percanggahan undang-undang dibangkitkan oleh Defendan.

The Summary Of The Defendant's Case (Enclosure 147)

[7] The summary of the Defendant's case is reproduced as follows:

Defendan adalah wakil Noble Mettle, LCC.

Transaksi di antara Plaintif dan Noble M

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top