B
BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD
Organisation 2 cases
About BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD
BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD appears as a party in 2 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning April 2025 to November 2025. BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD appeared as garnishee in 1 case, respondent in 1 case. Cases span the High Court (2).
How many court cases involve BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD?
BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD appears in 2 published judgments from April 2025 to November 2025. Most commonly as garnishee (1 cases).
Practice Areas
The Applicant is a Judgment Creditor, having secured a judgment against the Respondent in 2023, thereby rendering the Defendant a Judgment Debtor. To enforce the said judgment, the Judgment Creditor initiated garnishee proceedings against the Judgment Debtor’s accounts in 18 banks, pursuant to Order 49 of the Rules of Court 2012. However, these efforts proved futile when the High Court at Shah Alam, in Suit BA-37G-104-07/2024 (“Suit 104”), declined to grant the garnishee order absolute sought by the Plaintiff. The present dispute specifically concerns the Judgment Creditor and the Sixth Garnishee. Having successfully resisted the Judgment Creditor’s application for a garnishee order absolute before the Shah Alam High Court in Suit 104, the Sixth Garnishee now faces a fresh challenge 1 This Originating Summons concerns whether Edra’s call on Hyundai Engineering’s security bonds was unconscionable under sections 41–53 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 and clause 5.6 of the EPC Contract. The High Court held that Edra’s call on the Final Completion Bonds was invalid for failing to comply with the contractual prerequisite in clause 5.6(1)(e), but the call on the Warranty Bond was valid as no such notice was required. The key legal issue was whether the calls breached contractual conditions and met the threshold of unconscionability. 1