QAF NETWORK SDN BHD v 1. ) BAHAGIAN PERANCANG EKONOMI NEGERI JOHOR 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Johor

ja-21ncvc-35-12-2019 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 28 December 2024 • JA-21NCvC-35-12/2019 • 13 min read

2 cases cited (0 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

Atas alasan-alasan ini, Mahkamah ini memutuskan tuntutan Plaintif ditolak. - Tandatangan - (NURULHUDA NUR’AINI BINTI MOHAMAD NOR).

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (ja-21ncvc-35-12-2019). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

1. Mahkamah memutuskan tuntuan Plaintif ditolak, tiada kontrak yang sah wujud antara pihak-pihak terlibat. 2. Chinnock v Marchioness of Ely (1865) 4 De GJ & S 638 (at 646), di mana Lord Westbury menegaskan bahawa persetujuan yang dibuat bersyarat kepada kontrak tidak membentuk perjanjian yang sah. 3. Rossdale v Denny [1921] 1 Ch 57 (CA). 4. Winn v Bull (1877) 7 Ch D 29 (CA). 5. Richards (Michael) Properties Ltd v Corporation of Wardens of St Saviour’s Parish Southwark [1975] 2 AER 416. 6. Alpenstow Ltd v Regalian Properties plc [1985] 1 WLR 721.

Practice Areas

Contract

Judges (1)

Nurulhuda Nur'aini binti Mohamad Nor Delivered

Counsel (4)

Farah A. Zabir & Partners Firm Pejabat Undang-Undang Negeri Johor Firm Idris Zaidel Counsel Plaintiff Muhammad Azzam Bin Zainal Counsel Defendant

Parties (3)

BAHAGIAN PERANCANG EKONOMI NEGERI JOHOR Defendant Kerajaan Negeri Johor Defendant QAF NETWORK Sdn Bhd Plaintiff

Cases Cited (2)

UK (2)

[1921] 1 Ch 57 [1985] 1 WLR 721

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ja-21ncvc-35-12-2019)