BAHARUDIN BIN ABDUL LATIP v 1. ) PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 2. ) PRUDENTIAL BSN TAKAFUL BERHAD

wa-22ncc-391-08-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 5 October 2023 • WA-22NCC-391-08/2022 • 23 min read
5 cases cited (0 SG, 5 foreign)

Outcome

Pursuant to Order 33 Rule 5 ROC, as the determination of these preliminary issues substantially disposes of the cause or matter, I dismissed the Plaintiff’s action against both Defendants with costs of RM7,000/- subject to allocator.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (wa-22ncc-391-08-2022). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Agency Agreement - Termination without Cause - Contractual Interpretation - Insurance Agency Agreements – “Without Reason” Termination Clause - Validity of 14-day Notice Period - Fixed Term Contract v. Open-ended Contract - Sections 158 and 159 Contracts Act 1950 – “For any period of time” Requirement - Non-Application of Natural Justice Principles to Private Contracts - Non-Employer-Employee Relationship - Lawfulness of Termination - Sufficiency of Contractual Notice

Practice Areas

Contract Administrative Law Employment & Industrial Relations

Judges (1)

Wan Muhammad Amin bin Wan Yahya Delivered

Counsel (6)

Azim, Tunku Farik & Wong Firm Zulfiqri Zakaria & Co. Firm Mohd Zulfiqri Bin Zakaria Counsel Plaintiff Tan Sixin Counsel Defendant Veronica Pee Kui Yee Counsel Defendant Wong Hok Mun Counsel Defendant

Parties (3)

PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD Defendant PRUDENTIAL BSN TAKAFUL BERHAD Defendant Baharudin bin Abdul Latip Plaintiff

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
Federal Constitution
Art 5(1)
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (5)

MY (5)
[1969] 2 MLJ 233 [2002] 2 CLJ 267 [2002] 4 CLJ 49 [2013] 5 MLJ 407 [2020] MLJU 820

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ncc-391-08-2022)