TQ4_W5_C4 UCV4612 2018/2019

__________________________________________________________________________________

Question 1:
The Defendant (Roti Roti Manufacturing Sdn Bhd) has appointed the Plaintiff (One Auto
Worldwide (M) Sdn Bhd) to produce and pack various instant coffee under the brand Papparich
("PAPPARICH Products"). The Plaintiff alleged that Defendant had failed to pay a sum
RM769,837.05 for goods delivered to the Plaintiff and storage charges. A notice of demand
dated 6.7.2017 was issued to the Plaintiff demanding the payment of the said sum. The
Defendant did not comply to the said notice of demand and this had prompted the Plaintiff to
commence a civil suit in the Malacca Sessions Court vide civil suit MA-B52NCC-14-08/2017
("the said Malacca civil suit"). The Defendant has however refuted the claim. In its statement
of defence, the Defendant instead counterclaimed for the sum of RM3,009,540.78 as damages
allegedly for losses suffered due to the Plaintifft's breach in packaging the PAPPARICH
products. The Defendant has file a transfer of proceedings in Enclosure 1, from Melaka
Sessions Court to Shah Alam High Court. The Defendant in support of its application to
transfer the said Malacca civil suit to the Shah Alam High Court, had contended the following:
(i) the Defendant is domiciled in the state of Selangor Darul Ehsan as its main place
of business at No. 8, Jalan SS13/ 3B, Subang Jaya Industrial Estate, Petaling Jaya
47500 Selangor. The Defendant's registered address is also in Selangor namely;
at Lot 5, Jalan P 10/12, Kawasan Perusahaan Bangi, Bandar Baru Bangi, 43650
Selangor.
(ii) the Defendant's witnesses reside in Selangor. The Defendant will incur
unneccesary expenses to bring the witnesses to the Malacca Court. This would
be oppresive on the Defendant.
Discuss.

Question 2:

The appellants were partners of the legal firm of Messrs Paul Cheah & Assoc (‘the firm’), while
the respondent bank was a client of the firm. The respondent had granted a loan facility to a
company known as Polyidaman Sdn Bhd (‘Polyidaman’) and had appointed the firm to be its
solicitors to prepare loan security documentation for the loan. As a security for the loan,
Polyidaman had duly executed a charge under the National Land Code over its property in
favour of the respondent. When Polyidaman defaulted in its loan repayments the respondent
initiated legal proceedings against it. It was at that point, that the respondent discovered that
the charged property had been discharged without its knowledge. A search revealed that the
property had been transferred to a third person and that the same property was now charged to
CIMB Bank Bhd as a security for that third person’s loan. It was also discovered that the
discharge document contained a forged signature of one of the respondent’s officers and was
witnessed by one Frankie Tan Lyn Seang (‘Frankie Tan’), who was a partner of the firm.
Consequently, the respondent had commenced a suit to claim for the damages caused by the
firm’s negligence, fraud and breach of contract and duty of care. After a full trial, the High
Court awarded judgment in favour of the respondent. The firm’s appeal was dismissed by the
Court of Appeal. Subsequently, the respondent filed an application under O 77 r 5(4) of the
Rules of Court 2012 (‘the ROC’) (‘the application’) to execute the judgment personally against
all the four partners of the firm instead of the firm. The application was allowed by the High
Court. Hence, the present appeal by the appellants or two of the partners of the firm. In this
appeal the appellants only relied on one issue ie O 77 r 5(5) of the ROC.

Discuss.
__________________________________________________________________________________
NFA/SMM Page 1 of 2
TQ4_W5_C4 UCV4612 2018/2019
__________________________________________________________________________________

Question 1
The issue is whether the defendant may apply for transfer of proceeding from Sessions Court
to High Court.
According to Section 65(b) of the Subordinate

__________________________________________________________________________________
NFA/SMM Page 2 of 2