Back
2017 MarsdenLR 717
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KAMUJA HARTAMAS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
BANK KERJASAMA RAKYAT MALAYSIA BERHAD – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: W-02-(MUA)(W)-1322-08/2014]
Court found wrongful termination of financing facilities and mandated damage assessment due to insufficient justification from the Plaintiff for termination.
Headnote:The Plaintiff, under financing provisions, sought payment from the First Defendant related to a previously initiated legal action. The First Defendant counterclaimed damages due to wrongful termination of financial facilities. Courts found wrongful termination and ordered damages assessment. The ruling elaborated that restructuring proposals acknowledged by the Plaintiff were unjustifiably negated, implying a failure in the justification for contract termination.
Result: Appeal granted, case remitted for damage assessment.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the plaintiff's claim and the appeal process. (Para 1 , 2) |
[1] The Plaintiff, Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia Berhad claimed against the First Defendant for the recovery of monies which was due and payable under the financing facilities granted by the Plaintiff. The Second and Third Defendants were sued as guarantors. After a full trial and before the learned High Court Judge proceeded to deliver her decision, the First Defendant paid the amount claimed by the Plaintiff. The learned High Court Judge then proceeded to decide only on the counterclaim of the First Defendant which Her Ladyship had dismissed. This appeal by the First Defendant emanates from the dismissal of the counterclaim.
[2] We have heard the appeal and had allowed the appeal of the First Defendant. We ordered for damages to be assessed by the Registrar at the High Court. We set out below our reasons for our decision.
