UNISEL SDN BHD (Dahulunya dikenali sebagai PENDIDIKAN INDUSTRI YS SDN BHD) v SUDITASIA SDN BHD

ba-22ncvc-80-02-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 4 May 2026 • BA-22NCvC-80-02/2023 • 25 min read
26 cases cited (0 SG, 26 foreign)

Catchwords

Contract — Development agreement — Landowner and developer — Development of 50 acres of land — Defendant appointed as developer — Failure to complete development — Only part of project completed — Substantial portions remained unbuilt — Whether developer breached development agreement — Whether completion of “Phase 1” amounted to substantial compliance — Held: Defendant breached the Development Agreement. Contract — Construction and development project — Approved plans — Developer’s discretion — Whether developer had absolute discretion as to number and type of units — Clause requiring development to be carried out in accordance with approved plans and authority requirements — Held: Defendant’s discretion was not absolute. Contract — Time for completion — 48-month completion period — Whether time was of the essence — Subsequent dealings between parties after expiry of completion period — Whether time became at large — Commercial parties attempting to preserve contractual relationship — Held: Defendant still obliged to complete within contractual period or, alternatively, within reasonable time. Contract — Frustration / impossibility — Section 57 Contracts Act 1950 — Gravesite issue — Subdivision and pre-computation plans — Regulatory and administrative difficulties — Whether performance rendered impossible — Held: Practical difficulty not equivalent to legal impossibility. Contract — Prevention principle — Duty of cooperation — Alleged refusal by landowner to execute revised documents — Landowner’s right to protect proprietary interest — Whether Plaintiff prevented Defendant from performing — Held: No sufficient act of prevention established. Contract — Default and takeover clause — Clause 17 Development Agreement — Notices of default — Whether notices sufficiently identified default — Whether Plaintiff validly invoked contractual right to take over project — Commercial notices not to be construed with undue technicality — Held: Clause 17 validly invoked. Limitation — Contractual claim — Whether claim time-barred — Plaintiff’s claim arising from Defendant’s failure to comply with Clause 17 notices and refusal to give effect to takeover — Not merely claim for damages for non-completion in 2011 — Held: limitation defence not established. Equity — Waiver, estoppel and laches — Continued cooperation after expiry of completion period — Non-waiver clause — Whether Plaintiff abandoned contractual rights — Held: no waiver, estoppel or laches established. Equitable remedies — Mandatory injunction — Specific performance — Development agreement involving continuing obligations and supervision — Defendant itself in breach — Whether Court should compel continuation of commercial relationship — Held: mandatory injunction and specific performance refused. Damages — Counterclaim — Loss of profits and development expenditure — Requirement of proof — Speculative figures — Double recovery — Section 74 Contracts Act 1950 — Hadley v Baxendale — Held: Defendant failed to prove damages and counterclaim dismissed. Result — Plaintiff’s claim allowed — Defendant declared in breach of Development Agreement — Plaintiff validly invoked Clause 17 — Defendant ordered to return title and project documents — Defendant’s counterclaim dismissed — Costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Practice Areas

Contract

Judges (1)

Asmah binti Musa Delivered

Counsel (7)

Ibrahim & Fuadah Firm The Chambers of R. Sivagnanam & Associates Firm Muhamed Ibrahim bin Muhamed Counsel Plaintiff Nor Aziah Harun Counsel Plaintiff Nurfarah Athirah binti Muhammad Faiza Counsel Plaintiff Rutheran Sivagnanam Counsel Defendant Teh Wen Miin Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

SUDITASIA Sdn Bhd Defendant UNISEL Sdn Bhd Plaintiff

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)

Cases Cited (26)

UK (2)
[1904] 2 KB 264 [1941] AC 108
MY (24)
[1971] 1 MLJ 32 [1973] 2 MLJ 1 [1984] 1 MLJ 186 [1987] 1 MLJ 171 [1987] 1 MLJ 302 [1990] 1 MLJ 374 [1993] 1 MLJ 113 [1995] 2 MLJ 317 [1996] 1 MLJ 655 [1998] 2 MLJ 120 [1998] 6 MLJ 65 [1999] 1 MLJ 721 [2002] 2 MLJ 4 [2007] 3 MLJ 697 [2007] 5 MLJ 801 [2009] 8 MLJ 289 [2011] 6 MLJ 464 [2013] 1 MLJ 355 [2013] 6 MLJ 561 [2014] 6 MLJ 597 [2015] 6 MLJ 1 [2018] 1 MLJ 301 [2019] 6 MLJ 15 [2020] MLJU 1804

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-22ncvc-80-02-2023)