TSA INDUSTRIES SDN BHD v PEMUNYA DAN ATAU ORANG LAIN YANG BERKEPENTINGAN DALAM KAPAL MSR NO 1 (IMO 9141742) DARI PELABUHAN PANAMA

wa-27ncc-44-10-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 9 February 2026 • WA-27NCC-44-10/2022 • 41 min read

5 cases cited (0 SG, 5 foreign)

Catchwords

The plaintiff is the consignee of cargo carried on defendant’s vessel – The cargo was damaged during voyage due to a typhoon – Whether defendant has breached its contractual and bailment duty to ensure the safety and safe carriage of the plaintiff’s cargo – Whether the master of the vessel had failed to exercise the duty of good seamanship in securing the cargo on the vessel as well as recklessly sailing into the path of a typhoon – Whether the cargo, being deck cargo, was carried at the sole risk of the plaintiff – Whether the defendant is not liable for any loss to the cargo by virtue of the exclusion clauses in the Bill of Lading – Whether the loss was caused by events that fall within the definition of a peril of the sea.

Practice Areas

The plaintiff is the consignee of cargo carried on defendant’s vessel

Judges (1)

Quay Chew Soon Delivered

Counsel (9)

Azmi & Associates Firm T S Oon & Partners Firm Evelyn Ng Can Fei Counsel Plaintiff Lim Teng Li Counsel Plaintiff Ng May Counsel Defendant Nik Aisha Tasnim binti Nik Syahril Counsel Plaintiff Oon Thian Seng Counsel Defendant Philip Teoh Counsel Plaintiff Tan Hui Ling Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

TSA INDUSTRIES Sdn Bhd Plaintiff Pemunya Dan Atau Orang Lain Yang Berkepentingan Dalam Kapal Msr No 1 (imo 9141742) Dari Pelabuhan Panama Defendant

Case Significance

TSA INDUSTRIES SDN BHD v PEMUNYA DAN ATAU ORANG LAIN YANG BERKEPENTINGAN DALA... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated February 9, 2026 (citation: wa-27ncc-44-10-2022). <p>TSA Industries, the consignee of an annealing furnace carried on the vessel MSR No 1, claimed the cargo was damaged during the voyage from Shanghai to Port Klang when the vessel sailed into the path of Typhoon Muifa, alleging breach of contractual and bailment duty, failure of good seamanship, and negligence. The defendant vessel owner contended the cargo was deck cargo carried at the plaintiff's sole risk under the Bill of Lading exclusion clauses and that the loss was caused by a peril of t The case was decided by Quay Chew Soon.

Summary

TSA Industries, the consignee of an annealing furnace carried on the vessel MSR No 1, claimed the cargo was damaged during the voyage from Shanghai to Port Klang when the vessel sailed into the path of Typhoon Muifa, alleging breach of contractual and bailment duty, failure of good seamanship, and negligence. The defendant vessel owner contended the cargo was deck cargo carried at the plaintiff's sole risk under the Bill of Lading exclusion clauses and that the loss was caused by a peril of the sea. The court dismissed both the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's counterclaim for wrongful arrest, awarding costs of RM60,000 to the defendant.

What was the outcome of TSA INDUSTRIES SDN BHD v PEMUNYA DAN ATAU ORANG LAIN YANG BERKEPENTINGAN DALA...?

<p>TSA Industries, the consignee of an annealing furnace carried on the vessel MSR No 1, claimed the cargo was damaged during the voyage from Shanghai...

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)

s 101

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (5)

UK (2)

[1999] 1 All ER 724 [2019] EWHC 1001

MY (3)

[1975] 2 MLJ 73 [2015] 11 MLJ 145 [2025] MLJU 2749