Back
COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ZAHARAH IBRAHIM, ALIZATUL KHAIR OSMAN KHAIRUDDIN, VARGHESE GEORGE, JJ
Leisure Dotcom Sdn Bhd – Appellant
Versus
Globesource Sdn Bhd – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of facts and context of the spa. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. identifies key issues regarding performance under the spa. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 3. arguments asserting breaches related to the spa and defenses. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. court's assessment of contractual obligations and variations. (Para 14 , 24 , 30) |
| 5. conclusion on the validity of purchaser's rights and vendor's obligation. (Para 32 , 46 , 48) |
| 6. explains the principles of judicial appreciation of evidence. (Para 51) |
[1] The High Court had on 06.07.2012 after a full trial dismissed the Appellant’s suit for an order for specific performance to be granted in respect of a Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 21.06.2007 (the SPA) which had been entered into by the parties. The court went on to allow the Respondent’s counterclaim brought in the suit for the deposit to be forfeited, the caveat lodged by the Appellant to be removed and the damages occasioned in the interim by the presence of the caveat to be assessed.
[2] This appeal was against the whole of that decision. On 25.06.2014 we allowed the appeal and set aside the orders made by the learned Trial Judge in respect of both the claim and the counterc
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
