Timberbrand Sdn Bhd v PRS Forest Management (M) Sdn Bhd

ba-22ncvc-411-10-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 23 March 2025 • BA-22NCvC-411-10/2021 • 9 min read

3 cases cited (0 SG, 3 foreign)

Outcome

Conclusion [23] For the reasons stated, prayers (C) to (F) of the claim is allowed, and the counterclaim is dismissed with costs of RM30,000.00.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (ba-22ncvc-411-10-2021). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Repudiation of contract - Claim for wrongful termination and refund of the sums paid – Counterclaim for damages in loss of future crop production – Time of the essence - Whether time was set at large – Acquiescence - Whether Defendant had wrongfully terminated the contract

Practice Areas

Contract Restitution

Judges (1)

Elaine Yap Chin Gaik Delivered

Counsel (7)

Adrian & Co. Firm R. Raja Gopal & Co. Firm Adrian a/l Silvarajoo Counsel Defendant Krishnan Nair Counsel Plaintiff Nabihah Aqilah Counsel Plaintiff Nur Amalina binti Mohamad Rosli Counsel Defendant Raja Gopal A/L T Ramasamy Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

PRS Forest Management Sdn Bhd Defendant Timberbrand Sdn Bhd Plaintiff

Statutes Cited

Environmental Quality Act 1974 (Cap 127)

Cases Cited (3)

MY (3)

[1969] 1 MLRH 297 [1983] 1 CLJ 178 [2021] 5 CLJ 149

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-22ncvc-411-10-2021)