Sinar Teknik Urus Harta Sdn Bhd v 1. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KEWANGAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Datuk Seri Dr. Haji Dzulkefly Ahmad (Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia) 4. ) Dato' Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini Bin Ujang 5. ) Dato' Seri Anwar Bin Ibrahim (Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan Menteri Kewangan Malaysia) 6. ) Datuk Seri Amir Hamzah Azizan (Menteri Kewangan Malaysia II) 7. ) YB Senator Tengku Datuk Seri Utama Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz 8. ) Dato' Wan Murtadza Wan Mahmud 9. ) Mohd Fauzee bin Abd ...

Case Significance

Illustrates the striking out of a claim against the Government both for a factual premise contradicted by the contemporaneous documents and for seeking injunctive relief barred by section 29 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 and section 54 of the Specific Relief Act 1950.

This High Court decision at Kuala Lumpur concerns an application to strike out a contractor's writ and statement of claim against the Government and its ministries and officials, arising from a hospital-support-services tender. The plaintiff, a facilities-management company, had sued in connection with a five-year tender for support services at a national cancer institute, naming the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Finance, and a number of ministers and senior officials as defendants. The defendants applied under Order 18 rule 19(1)(b) or (d) of the Rules of Court 2012 to strike the claim out, and the court allowed that application.

The court examined the factual foundation of the claim and found it wanting. On the evidence in the defendants' supporting affidavit, the confidential letters the plaintiff relied on were internal communications between ministries and were not intended for circulation to the plaintiff, and there was no letter of the date the plaintiff had pleaded. The plaintiff's case therefore rested on documents that did not bear the character, or exist in the form, that the pleading asserted.

Decisively, the court held that the relief the plaintiff sought was in substance injunctive relief that the law does not permit against the Government. Section 29 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 and section 54 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 clearly limit the court's jurisdiction to grant injunctions, whether interim or final, against the Government or a government agency, and the court cited established authority to that effect, including Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang. Because the claim was founded on a defective factual premise and sought relief barred by statute against the Government, the court found it fell within the striking-out limbs and allowed the application, striking out the writ and statement of claim. The judgment illustrates both the evidential fragility of a pleading contradicted by the contemporaneous documents and the statutory bar on injunctions against the Government.