[1] A Judgment in Default of Appearance (JID) dated 14 September 2016 had been entered against the appellants (as the 4th and 5th defendants) by the respondent (as the plaintiff) at the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The appellants had filed an application pursuant to O 13 r 8 of the Rules of 2012 ( ROC ) to set aside the said JID. The application was dismissed on 21 March 2018, hence the appeal before us.

Issues

[2] The appellants raised two issues before us as follows:

(i) whether the JID was regular;

(ii) whether the appellants had shown they had merits in their defence.

Submissions

[3] Concerning the 1st issue, learned counsel for the appellants' submission was twofold; on the liquidated demand and on the service of the Writ. On the liquidated demand, learned counsel submitted that the High Court had erred when a final judgment was en