A defendant seeking to set aside a Judgment in Default must demonstrate satisfactory reasons for any delay and show a meritorious defence; failure to do so results in dismissal of the application.

JUDGMENT

Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad J:

Introduction

[1] This judgment concerns an application by the Defendant to set aside a Judgment in Default obtained by the Plaintiff pursuant to the Defendant's failure to enter an appearance in a suit filed by the Plaintiff for breach of contract. The Plaintiff's claim against the Defendant arises from a contract for the supply and delivery of medical examination gloves which the Defendant failed to fulfil, resulting in loss and damage to the Plaintiff. The Defendant contends that the Judgment in Default should be set aside as the delay in filing the application was unintentional and it has a defence on the merits, namely that the Plaintiff's proper cause of action lies against the Defendant's supplier and not the Defendant itself. The Plaintiff opposes the application on the grounds that it is filed out of time without any satisfactory reasons and the Defendant has not demonstrated a valid defence on the merits or raised any triable issues to warrant the Judgment in Default being set aside.

Background Facts

[2] The Plaintiff, NPG Global Pte Ltd, and the Defendant, Malaysian German Resources Sdn Bhd entered into a contract for the sale and purchase of gloves during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Defendant was to sell and deliver gloves obtained from a supplier named Eco Movers Service to the Plaintiff.

[3] The transactions between the Plaintiff and Defendant were detailed in 3 Purchase Orders dated 7 December 2020 issued by the Plaintiff and 3 Proforma Invoices dated 7 December 2020 issued by the Defendant. The Purchase Orders placed the responsibility for quality and specification of the gloves on the Defendant. The Defendant's Proforma Invoices estimated a delivery date range from end of December 2020 to 10 January 2021.

[4] On 7 December 2020, at the same time the Purchase Orders and Proforma Invoices were issued between the Plaintiff and Defendant, the Defendant issued Order Notes to Eco Movers Service for the preparation of the gloves for the Plaintiff.

[5] On 9 December 2020, the Plaintiff paid a deposit of USD653,940.00, equivalent to 70% of the total Purchase Order amount. The Defendant subsequently paid Eco Movers Service a 70% deposit of the value of the Defendant's Order Notes.

[6] The Plaintiff visited the Eco Movers Service factory on 22 December 2020 to observe the packing of the ordered gloves into boxes. Due to delays by Eco Movers Service in preparing and delivering the gloves to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff conducted inspections at the Eco Movers Service factory on 14 January 2021 and 15 January 2021.

[7] On 29 March 2021, the Defendant lodged a police report regarding the breach of contract by Eco Movers Service and requested return of the deposit money in order to refund the Plaintiff. However, the Defendant made a partial refund of the deposit to the Plaintiff amounting to USD35,582.00.

[8] On 14 July 2022, the Plaintiff entered Judgment in Default against the Defendant for the following amounts:

a) Immediate refund by the Defendant to the Plaintiff of the outstanding deposit balance of RM2,652,755.82 equivalent to USD618,358.00 at the exchange rate of RM4.29 as of 20 April 2022;

b) Immediate payment by the Defendant to the Plaintiff of compensation amounting to USD94,420.00 equivalent to RM400,771.80 at the exchange rate of RM4.29 as of 20 April 2022, being 10% compensation on the contract value of USD934,200.00;

c) General damages for loss of profits and loss of business to be assessed;

d) Aggravated and exemplary damages to be assessed;

e) Damages for injury to reputation and goodwill to be assessed;

f) Interest at 5% per annum on the above amounts payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff from the date of Judgment until full settlement; and

g) Costs of RM1,500.00.

The Defendant's Application

[9] In this application in encl 35, the Defendant seeks the following orders:

a) Leave for the Defendant to make this application.

b) The setting aside a Judgment in Default dated 14 July 2022, that w