L Vince Sdn Bhd v Sekolah Menengah Stella Maris (Persendirian) Kuala Lumpur

wa-12bncvc-127-10-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 19 February 2025 • WA-12BNCvC-127-10/2024 • 16 min read
3 cases cited (0 SG, 3 foreign)

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (6)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

A clear application of the rule that special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proven, defeating a supplier’s claim for unsold stock and post-contract storage costs.

This High Court decision at Kuala Lumpur is an appeal by a supplier company, L Vince Sdn Bhd, against the Sessions Court’s dismissal of its claim against a private secondary school, Sekolah Menengah Stella Maris (Persendirian) Kuala Lumpur. The parties had contracted in 2016 for the supplier to operate a uniform shop on the school’s premises and to supply and sell uniforms designed specifically for the school. When the original three-year contract expired the parties tried but failed to agree terms for a further term, and as part of winding down the arrangement the supplier was permitted to remain on the premises rent-free for a year. The supplier then sued for a substantial sum for unsold uniform stock, for storage costs said to be accruing daily, and for interest and general damages, but the Sessions Court dismissed the claim with costs and the supplier appealed. The High Court dismissed the appeal. On the claim for the price of unsold uniforms, it held that these were in the nature of special damages, which must be specifically pleaded and strictly proven, applying the principles restated by the Court of Appeal in Tenaga Nasional Bhd v Big Man Management Sdn Bhd, and it found that the supplier had failed to prove its case on the balance of probabilities, not having produced even a single uniform or a credible paper trail of payment to substantiate the claim. On the storage costs, the Court held that, the original contract not having been renewed, the school could not be made responsible for storage the supplier had arranged after vacating the premises. Accordingly, per Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin Shah J, the appeal was found to be without merit and dismissed with costs of RM15,000 subject to allocatur. The judgment is a clear application of the strict-proof rule for special damages.

Why did the claim for unsold uniform stock fail?

Because it was a claim for special damages, which must be specifically pleaded and strictly proven. Applying Tenaga Nasional Bhd v Big Man Management Sdn Bhd, the Court found the supplier had not proved its case on the balance of probabilities, producing neither a single uniform nor a credible paper trail of payment.

Was the school liable for the storage costs claimed?

No. The Court held that, since the original contract had not been renewed, the school could not be made responsible for storage the supplier arranged after it had already vacated the premises. The appeal was dismissed with costs of RM15,000.

Cases Cited (3)

MY (3)
[2005] 2 MLJ 1 [2022] 4 MLJ 51 [2024] 2 CLJ 775

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-12bncvc-127-10-2024)