OREZON ENGINEERING SDN BHD v RADICARE (M) SDN BHD

wa-22ncc-88-02-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 4 February 2026 • WA-22NCC-88-02/2024 • 8 min read
1 cases cited (0 SG, 1 foreign)

Outcome

For the reasons above, I dismissed the Defendant’s application with costs and proceeded to hear the summary judgment application.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (wa-22ncc-88-02-2024). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure - Pleadings – Amendment of Defence – Application for leave to amend 19 months after close of pleadings – Factors for consideration – Whether there was a cogent explanation for inordinate delay – Change of solicitors and out-of-court settlement negotiations as excuses for delay – Lack of bona fides – Proposed amendments seen as tactical reconstruction to manufacture triable issues in response to a summary judgment application – Relevance of amendments – Internal procedures and benchmark pricing – Inconsistency in pleading where Defendant simultaneously denies and relies upon purchase orders – Prejudice to Plaintiff – Judicial discretion – Rules of Court 2012 – Hong Leong Finance Bhd v Low Thiam Hoe & Another Appeal [2016] 1 MLJ 301 followed.

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Muhammad Adam bin Abdullah Delivered

Counsel (6)

Aisha Mubarak & Co. Firm Low & Partners Firm Aisha Mubarak Counsel Defendant Annesha Mary Koshy Counsel Defendant Derek Chin Tze Qi Counsel Plaintiff Wai Chong Khuan Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

OREZON ENGINEERING Sdn Bhd Plaintiff RADICARE Sdn Bhd Defendant

Statutes Cited

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (1)

UK (1)
[1954] 3 All ER 745

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ncc-88-02-2024)