100%(1)100% menganggap dokumen ini bermanfaat (1 suara)
132 tayangan1 halaman
The plaintiff and defendant entered into a joint venture agreement regarding a piece of land, but the defendant failed to perform within the stipulated time. The plaintiff terminated the agreement and sold the land to a third party. At trial, the plaintiff's counsel submitted a consent order stating the parties had reached a settlement. The court ruled that parties are bound by agreements reached to determine issues, but the trial judge still controls proceedings. The consent order must be given contractual effect.
The plaintiff and defendant entered into a joint venture agreement regarding a piece of land, but the defendant failed to perform within the stipulated time. The plaintiff terminated the agreement and sold the land to a third party. At trial, the plaintiff's counsel submitted a consent order stating the parties had reached a settlement. The court ruled that parties are bound by agreements reached to determine issues, but the trial judge still controls proceedings. The consent order must be given contractual effect.
The plaintiff and defendant entered into a joint venture agreement regarding a piece of land, but the defendant failed to perform within the stipulated time. The plaintiff terminated the agreement and sold the land to a third party. At trial, the plaintiff's counsel submitted a consent order stating the parties had reached a settlement. The court ruled that parties are bound by agreements reached to determine issues, but the trial judge still controls proceedings. The consent order must be given contractual effect.
STEVE SHIM CJ, ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD FCJ, MOHD NOOR AHMAD FCJ Summary of Facts 1. P entered into a joint-venture agreement (JVA) with D. 2. D failed to perform the agreement within the stipulated time and P gave the D notice to terminate the JVA. 3. The land was sold to the third party and P brought an action to the High Court for a declaration that the JVA had been rescinded, damages for breach of contract and special damages. 4. At the trial, Ps counsel tendered encl. 37 document as a consent order and informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement. Issue: 1. Whether the parties to a civil action in the High Court are bound by the agreement reached between themselves on the mode and manner of determining certain issues of fact which are the subject matter of proceedings 2. Whether such an agreement by the parties amounts to dictating how the trial court should conduct its proceedings Defendants Arguments
NA
Plaintiffs Arguments
NA
Courts decision and reasoning
1. The first issue should be answered in affirmative.
A consent judgment or order is not the less a contract. 2. A consent order must be given its full contractual effect. 3. The answer to the second issue is that the control of proceedings is always a matter of the trial judge. The parties to the action may agree as to the manner of settling their dipute.