EKOVEST CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL SDN. BHD.) v 1. ) Choo Teik Shiong 2. ) GOH SEE KWONG 3. ) NG YIN CHING 4. ) YAP PEI LEE 5. ) TAN SUET FONG 6. ) YAP CHEE WEE

wa-12bncvc-30-02-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 9 June 2025 • WA-12BNCvC-30-02/2024 • 18 min read
27 cases cited (0 SG, 27 foreign)

Catchwords

the Plaintiffs’ claim is now time-barred under s 6 of the Limitation Act 1953 - the principles as enunciated in [2019] 6 MLRA 494 are distinguishable from the present facts - the Plaintiffs have failed to challenge the EoT vide judicial review - the Plaintiffs are estopped from claiming additional LAD from the Defendant as this would amount to an unjust enrichment on the part of the Plaintiffs - the Plaintiffs have failed to satisfy the parole evidence rule pursuant to s 91 of the Evidence Act 1950

Practice Areas

the Plaintiffs’ claim is now time-barred under s 6 of the Limitation Act 1953

Judges (1)

Aliza binti Sulaiman Delivered

Counsel (4)

Jeeva Partnership Firm Lee & Lim Firm Dato' Shamesh Jeevaratnam Counsel Appellant Lim Kien Huat Counsel Respondent

Parties (7)

EKOVEST CAPITAL Sdn Bhd. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL Sdn Bhd.) Appellant Choo Teik Shiong Respondent Goh See Kwong Respondent Ng Yin Ching Respondent Tan Suet Fong Respondent Yap Chee Wee Respondent Yap Pei Lee Respondent

Case Significance

EKOVEST CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL SDN. BHD.) ... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated June 9, 2025 (citation: wa-12bncvc-30-02-2024). <p>Six purchasers of residential units at the EkoCheras project claimed liquidated ascertained damages for late delivery against the developer Ekovest Capital. The High Court allowed the developer's appeal in part, varying the Sessions Court's award to recalculate LAD from the date of booking fee until the date of SPA, in line with the Federal Court's decision in Obata Ambak, significantly reducing the amounts payable.</p> The case was decided by Aliza binti Sulaiman. Counsel appearing: Dato' Shamesh Jeevaratnam (counsel for appellant), Lim Kien Huat (counsel for respondent).

Summary

Six purchasers of residential units at the EkoCheras project claimed liquidated ascertained damages for late delivery against the developer Ekovest Capital. The High Court allowed the developer's appeal in part, varying the Sessions Court's award to recalculate LAD from the date of booking fee until the date of SPA, in line with the Federal Court's decision in Obata Ambak, significantly reducing the amounts payable.

What was the outcome of EKOVEST CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL SDN. BHD.) ...?

<p>Six purchasers of residential units at the EkoCheras project claimed liquidated ascertained damages for late delivery against the developer Ekovest...

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
s 64
Courts of Judicature Act 1964
s 29
Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)
s 91
Limitation Act 1953 (Cap 254)
s 6

Cases Cited (27)

MY (27)
[1984] 2 MLJ 165 [1988] 2 MLJ 170 [1995] 2 MLJ 597 [2003] 2 CLJ 19 [2003] 2 MLJ 97 [2004] 4 CLJ 309 [2005] 2 MLJ 1 [2008] 2 CLJ 284 [2008] 2 MLJ 87 [2009] 6 CLJ 626 [2009] 6 MLJ 1 [2010] 3 CLJ 377 [2010] 3 MLJ 509 [2012] 4 MLJ 149 [2012] 6 MLJ 1 [2013] 4 MLJ 693 [2015] 2 MLJ 441 [2016] 2 MLJ 428 [2017] 5 CLJ 58 [2020] 1 CLJ 162 [2020] 1 MLJ 281 [2020] 12 MLJ 67 [2021] 2 MLJ 60 [2024] 5 MLJ 417 [2024] 5 MLJ 897 [2024] MLJU 2399 [2025] AMEJ 1247