Introduction

[1] This appeal by the Appellant emanated from the decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge ("LSCJ") dated 11 February 2022 in allowing the Respondent's claim against the Appellant with costs after a full trial.

[2] In this judgment, the parties will be referred to as they were in the Sessions Court. In the Court below, the Appellant herein was the Defendant, whilst the Respondent was the Plaintiff.

[3] On 3 January 2023, I allowed the Defendant's appeal with costs. These are the reasons as to why.

Background

[4] The background facts are agreed facts:

4.1 In October 2017, the Plaintiff approached the Defendant to purchase light emitting diodes ("LED") from the Defendant;

4.2 The purchase of the LED lights by the Plaintiff was for the purpose of installing them on the facade of an office tower in Putrajaya (the "Project");

4.3 Enquiries were made about a specific LED light, namely the VarioLED Flex Amor 827 SV IP67 lights ("VarioLED"), which the Defendant sells;

4.4 The Defendant provided a copy of the catalogue of the VarioLED to the Plaintiff ("catalogue");

4.5 It was specified in the catalogue, amongst others, that:

(a) the maximum ambient temperature