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

2015 MarsdenLR 324

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
ANEKA MELOR SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SERI SABCO (M) SDN BHD & ANOTHER APPEALS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. the action was statute-barred as it was filed after the expiration of the limitation period. (Para 21 , 23)
2. allegations of fraudulent behavior require substantial proof beyond simple contractual failure. (Para 30)

[14] With respect, we disagree with the submission of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's claims against the 1st defendant in the present action was based on contract which must be filed in COURT within the period of six years from the date of the accrual of the cause of action as provided for under s 6(1) of Act 254. A 'cause of action' has been defined as "every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support his right to the judgment of the COURT". (See Read v. Brown [1888] 22 QBD 128, 131).

[15] The general rule in contract is the cause of action accrues not when the damage is suffered but when the breach occurred. Consequently, the limitation period runs from the time the contract is breached and not from the time that the resulting damage is sustained by the plaintiff.

[16] In Nasri v. Mesah , 1970 MarsdenLR 308 , the Federal COURT per Gill FJ enunciated on the "date of accrual in the case of debt" as f

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