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

2016 MarsdenLR 1781

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PERCETAKAN KOLOMBONG RIA SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
WAWASAN IKTISAS SDN BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Joan Goh ,Respondent Advocate: Sonny Durai

Table of Content
1. trial duration and initial judgment entry. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. contract formation and obligations. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. legal interpretation of contract terms. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. court's consideration of acceptance. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)

[1] We begin by pointing out the unfortunate fact that the trial of this case took a mere 22 days on diverse dates in the months of April, June and July 2009; the judgment nevertheless, was only delivered on 12 December 2013, some three years after the conclusion of the hearing. The learned judge entered judgment against the respondent (the defendant in the court below) for the sum of RM39,422.40 plus interest of 5% per annum on the judgment sum calculated from 16 February 2004 until full settlement. It is noteworthy that the respondent joined the Mayor of the City of Kota Kinabalu and DBKK Holdings Sdn Bhd as the first and second third parties respectively claiming to be indemnified by the third parties against the appellant's claim. However, the respondent's claim against the third parties were dismissed for which, we observe, no appeal was filed by the respondent against the dismissal of its claim.

Facts

[2] In the

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