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

2012 MarsdenLR 1772

COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
UG HOTEL PROPERTY SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CHEE SOO LAM & ANOR – Respondent


Table of Content
1. court's reasoning and implications of contractual terms. (Para 1 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 20)
2. background facts of the dispute. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8)
3. termination and defamation issues. (Para 7 , 10 , 13)
4. agreed trial parameters and undisputed facts. (Para 9 , 14)
5. judgment outcomes and orders. (Para 11 , 12)
6. respondents breached the agreement. (Para 21)

[1] The appellant (the defendant before the High Court) herein had appealed against the decision of the learned High Court Judge, Alor Star who had allowed the respondent's (the plaintiff below) claim after full trial.

[2] The brief background facts are as follows:

The respondents were partners of a business enterprise operating under the style and name of Perniagaan Spanova. The appellant was the owner of Novotel Hotel (said Hotel) which is situated in Sungai Petani, Kedah Darul Aman. Vide agreement dated 1 March 1997, (the said agreement) the appellant had agreed to rent a premise (the said premises) in the said hotel to the respondents for the latter to operate a health spa.

[3] Under the said agreement, the tenancy period was to commence from 1 March 1997 and was for a duration of three years. The parties s

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