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

2016 MarsdenLR 2316

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CHINA HARBOUR ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD – Appellant
Versus
LUNAR SHIPPING AGENCIES SDN BHD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. establishing the case and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2)
2. key issues to determine in the appeal. (Para 3)
3. trial proceedings overview and evidence produced. (Para 4 , 5)
4. explanation of law regarding agency and contractual obligations. (Para 18 , 24)
JUDGMENT

(Pursuant To An Order Of The Court Of Appeal)

Wong Kian Kheong JC:

A. Introduction

[1] This claim (Plaintiffs Claim) by the plaintiff company [a company incorporated in the Peoples Republic of China (Plaintiff)], and the counterclaim (Defendants Counterclaim) by the defendant company [a company incorporated in Malaysia (Defendant)] had been tried and decided by the Shah Alam High Court on 20 August 2014 (SAHCs Decision).

[2] Both the Plaintiff and Defendant have appealed to the Court of Appeal against the SAHCs Decision. On 4 March 2015, the Court of Appeal had ordered, among others, that this case be re-heard on its merits in the Kuala Lumpur High Court (Admiralty Division) (CAs Order). Hence, this case before me pursuant to the CAs Order (KLHC Proceedings).

B. Issues

[3] The following questions, among others, arise in this case:

(1) whether the Plaintiff was the principal of PK Shipping Agency Co. Ltd., Thailand

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top