2013 MarsdenLR 944

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DATO SHAZRYL ESKAY ABDULLAH – Appellant
Versus
MERONG MAHAWANGSA SDN BHD & ANOR – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: W-02-1438-2011]

The determination of a payment claim depends on the distinction between the award of a project and the project itself; termination of the project does not invalidate the entitlement if the award remains effective.

Headnote:(A) Contract Law - Letter of Undertaking - Claim for RM20,000,000.00 for services rendered regarding the Bridge Project - Appellant successfully procured the project; however, payment was not made due to eventual project termination - The court emphasized that the award subsisted while the project was invalidated; thus, the appellant is entitled to the agreed payment, upheld by evidence of continuous service link to the project. (Paras 4, 11, 14, 18)

(B) The court addressed whether the evolution of the Bridge Project into the Crooked Bridge Project affected the validity of the claim, ruling that both projects were interconnected for the appellant's services. (Paras 7, 8, 19)

(C) The contractual intention regarding the relationship between 'award' and 'project' was examined, concluding that the appellant's right to payment persisted as the award remained valid despite the project's termination. (Paras 14, 16, 20)

Findings of Court:
The appellant’s claim is valid based on the letter of undertaking despite the project’s termination, emphasizing the integrality of the project's award.

Issues: The court addressed whether the transformation of project types rendered the claim incompetent and whether the project's termination affected the appellant's entitlement.

Ratio Decidendi: The significance is placed on the distinction between the project and award; termination of the project did not affect the claim as the award was never withdrawn.

Result: Appeal allowed with costs.