JUDGMENT

Zainun Ali JCA:

(1) I am in full agreement with my learned brother Ramly Ali, JCA in his judgment which have coherently set out the facts of this appeal and the rationale which is applicable therein.

(2) The concept of unconscionability has steadily grown in stature and has had firm footholds in other jurisdictions.

(3) In the past, judicial pronouncements went the way of fraud as being the only ground, in seeking an injunction to restrain a call on a performance bond. However recent judicial pronouncements have confirmed that unconscionability has a place in such circumstances, as an additional ground.

(4) In my view, consonant with the principle as laid down by my learned brother, unconscionability is a doctrine which allows courts to deny enforcement of a contract because of abuses arising out of the contact.

(5) In my view the principle underlying the unconscionability doctrine is the prevention of oppression and unfair conduct; and because the determination of unconscionability is fact specific, courts must consider such a claim on a case by case basis and assess the totality of the circumstances.

(6) One such instance is found in the Singapore case of Gammon