HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
MALAYSIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADING CORPORATION (JAPAN) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
BENTINI SPA & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the agreement between plaintiff and defendants. (Para 1 , 1 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 2. background facts of the joint venture. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. previous legal disputes related to the agreements. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. issues to be determined by the court. (Para 23 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
[1] What is in a name? A lot as will be seen in this case. For the plaintiff, it is more than a name. It claims that the name "NF Energy-Bentini JV" represents a partnership between the first and second defendants. It claims that it was the basis upon which the plaintiff had contracted with these defendants. For the first defendant, it is just a name; not a partnership.
Background facts
[2] It all started far away, in Sudan, in fact with a company called Petrodar Operating Company Limited ("Petrodar"). Petrodar is a joint venture company comprising China National Petroleum Corporation, Petroliam Nasional Berhad, Sudan Petroleum Company Limited, China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation and Al-Thani Corporation.
[3] The first and second defendants, formed a consortium known as "NF Energy-Bentini JV" ("the JV") which successfully secured an engineering, procurement, construction and
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.