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
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.