LEE CHAI SENG PENCELAH MAGNUM CONSORTIUM SDN BHD

Case Significance

An appeal and cross-appeal against a registrar's damages assessment, adjusting the calculation period, confirming 5% interest under Order 42 rule 12, and testing a claim for additional bank-loan financing costs.

This High Court decision concerns an appeal and cross-appeal against a Deputy Registrar's assessment of damages carried out pursuant to an earlier High Court order dated 29 September 2011. Following that order, damages fell to be assessed by the Deputy Registrar, and both the applicant and the intervener company were dissatisfied with the resulting assessment and brought the matter before the Judge in Chambers — the applicant by appeal and the intervener by cross-appeal. The underlying dispute concerned the applicant's position as director and majority shareholder in relation to the subject lands.

On the applicant's appeal, the Court was concerned with the correct period over which damages should be calculated and the interest to be awarded. It allowed the applicant's appeal in part, holding that the damages were to be calculated from 10 March 2011 until the date of the High Court order of 29 September 2011, and it addressed the running of interest, with interest at 5% per annum from 29 September 2011 until full settlement, together with costs. The rate of 5% per annum fixed by the Deputy Registrar was affirmed by reference to Order 42 rule 12 of the Rules of Court, which governs interest on judgment debts.

The intervener's cross-appeal sought substantial additional damages of RM6,190,634.83, representing interest said to have been incurred on a bank loan taken to finance the purchase of the subject lands. That head of loss fell to be tested against the principles governing the recoverability and proof of consequential damages on an assessment. The judgment is a useful illustration of how a court reviews a registrar's assessment of damages on appeal — adjusting the period of calculation, confirming the applicable rate of interest under Order 42 rule 12, and scrutinising a claim for additional financing costs advanced by way of cross-appeal.