Back
2011 MarsdenLR 997
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KOTA KINABALU
SAGAJUTA (SABAH) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
TRANE MALAYSIA SALES & SERVICES SDN BHD – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: KK-22-104-2011]
A summary judgment is granted when a defense lacks bona fides and does not raise triable issues, affirming the validity of creditor's certifications as admissions of debt.
Headnote:(A) Civil Law Act 1956 - Section 11 - Application for summary judgment - Defendant sought RM3,641,315.73 based on plaintiff's certification - Plaintiff disputed certification but provided no evidence to support claims of inaccuracies - Court found an admission of debt in audit certification, ruling in favor of defendant - Agreement required payments upon certification by architect. (Paras 7-9)
(B) Summary Judgment - Court's role in summary judgment is to determine if there are triable issues - If the plaintiff's defense lacks bona fides and does not raise triable issues, summary judgment may be granted in favor of the defendant. (Paras 9)
Facts of the case:
The plaintiff commissioned the defendant for installation services, with the defendant claiming RM3,641,315.73 based on certified completion, while the plaintiff argued that a reversal of claims contradicted the amount.
Findings of Court:
The court found the plaintiff's denial unsubstantiated, leading to the conclusion that the defendant's claims were upheld based on established certifications.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the defendant was entitled to summary judgment based on the validity and accuracy of the certifications made by the plaintiff.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded there were no triable issues from the plaintiff’s side, affirming that the certification request constituted an admission of debt and clarifying that summary judgment is granted when a defense lacks merit.
Result: Judgment granted in favor of the defendant for RM3,641,315.73, with interest and costs as outlined.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for summary judgment based on admission. (Para 1 , 2) |
[1] Before me is an application for summary judgment by the defendant for its counterclaim of RM3,641,315.73 against the plaintiff relying on an admission by the plaintiff.
Background Facts:
[2] The plaintiff pursuant to an agreement dated 24 April 2006 commissioned the defendant to install an Air-conditioning and Mechanical Ventilation System & Services in the Borneo Complex (agreement). Works have been carried out by the defendant and as at 28 April 2010, a sum of RM3,641,315.73 had been certified completed by the plaintiff. It is upon this certification that the defendant has lodged this application for summary judgment. The plaintiff's rebuttal is that there has been a reversal of the defendant's claims of RM3,602,314.00 on 24 April 2010 which effectively wiped out the plaintiff's claim.
