Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
HASRAT IDAMAN SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
MERSING CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of contract arrangements and claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. defendant's position on claim validity. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 3. evaluation of claims against contractual obligations. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 50 , 51 , 55 , 56) |
| 4. final decision and rationale for dismissal. (Para 75) |
Mary Lim Thiam Suan J:
Facts
[1] By letter dated 7 September 2001, DRB-HICOM, as contractor, appointed a company known as Azamme Sdn Bhd (Azamme) to carry out works in relation "Electrified Double Track Project between Rawang and Ipoh (Infrastructure Works) (the project). The works comprised two elements, the relocation of utilities and the Horizontal Directional Drilling Works (HDD) works. Azamme, as the "specialist sub-contractor", sub-contracted the project to the defendant as principal sub-contractor vide letter dated 29 September 2001.
[2] According to the plaintiff's re-amended statement of claim, by letter dated 15 October 2001, the plaintiff was appointed by the defendant as a sub-contractor only for the works in relation to "Utilities Relocation for Electrical Works (TNB)" (the works) for a contract price of RM5,379,806.25 (su
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
