SAMUDERA WIBAWA SDN BHD v PRUDENCE ENERGY SDN BHD
Catchwords
Contract — Oral contract — Ship repair works — Claim for work done — Whether additional works fell within original contract sum or were separately chargeable — Whether contractor entitled to payment for additional works requested and accepted by employer — Contracts Act 1950, s 71 Contract — Quantum meruit — Restitution — Work done not intended to be gratuitous — Employer having enjoyed benefit of additional repair works — Whether contractor entitled to compensation notwithstanding dispute as to contractual scope — Contracts Act 1950, s 71 Contract — Performance — Substantial performance — Whether contractor substantially performed obligations under ship repair contract — Residual welding works not completed — Whether employer entitled to withhold balance contract sum — Doctrine of substantial performance Contract — Prevention principle — Whether employer precluded from relying on non-completion where employer’s refusal to pay for additional works prevented completion — Whether party may benefit from own default Contract — Time of essence — Whether completion by 31 May 2023 contractual deadline — Whether WhatsApp messages constituted clear notice making time of essence — Whether subsequent conduct amounted to waiver of strict compliance — Contracts Act 1950, s 56 Evidence — Opinion evidence — Expert evidence — Marine survey report — Whether Bottom Plate Renewal Survey Report admissible where maker not tendered as expert witness — Non-compliance with O 40A Rules of Court 2012 — Distinction between factual testimony and expert evaluative opinion — Rules of Court 2012, O 40A Evidence — Adverse inference — Failure to call material witness — Site representative not called to testify — Whether adverse inference properly drawn under s 114(g) Evidence Act 1950 — Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g) Damages — Special damages — Counterclaim for rental, wages and losses — Requirement of strict proof — Whether losses sufficiently proved as to quantum and causation — Evidence Act 1950, ss 101–103 Appeal — Findings of fact — Appellate intervention — Whether trial judge plainly wrong — Deference to findings based on credibility and contemporaneous documents — Scope of appellate review
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ma-12bncvc-11-12-2025)