KLF AUTOMATE SDN. BHD. (dahulunya dikenali sebagai Hainan Long Quan Wen Chang Chicken (M) Sdn. Bhd. v WONG SEIW WAI

Case Significance

Illustrates that special damages requiring proof of quantum are generally unsuitable for summary judgment under Order 14, and should be ventilated at trial even where liability appears strong.

This High Court decision, sitting in its appellate jurisdiction, concerns an appeal against a summary judgment given by the Sessions Court under Order 14 of the Rules of Court 2012. KLF Automate Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Hainan Long Quan Wen Chang Chicken (M) Sdn Bhd), the appellant and defendant below, challenged the Sessions Court's decision to enter summary judgment against it for one of the reliefs claimed — special or liquidated damages — while the respondent's remaining claims for injunctive relief and general damages stayed pending. The dispute arose from the sale of a used motor vehicle; the respondent, who had purchased the vehicle, alleged that after paying part of the price directly to the appellant and part to an intermediary dealer, the transfer of ownership was not completed, causing the loss of a subsequent onward sale. The principal question on appeal was whether the appellant had a defence to the special-damages claim — that is, whether any triable issue existed that made summary disposal inappropriate. The court worked through the appellant's grounds of objection, rejecting several as without merit, including a pleading objection: although the statement of claim was inelegant, it referred to "hutang" (debt) and pleaded sufficient facts, so the deficiency was not fatal. The court also treated references to the involvement of third parties as "red herrings" with no bearing on the claim. Nevertheless, it concluded that the award of special damages by way of the summary procedure ought to be set aside so that the quantum could be proven and ventilated at trial, observing that if the respondent ultimately succeeded she could be compensated in costs. The court set aside the Sessions Court's decision, allowed the appeal with costs of RM5,000.00, and remitted the matter to be heard in another Sessions Court. The judgment illustrates the limits of Order 14 where special damages require proof at trial.