Raub Oil Mill Sdn Bhd v Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow

wa-22ncc-182-04-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 11 March 2026 • WA-22NCC-182-04/2023 • 28 min read

12 cases cited (0 SG, 12 foreign)

Catchwords

Civil Procedure – Summary judgment – Order 14 Rules of Court 2012 – Banking institution’s claim for outstanding banking facilities – Letter of Offer and Personal Guarantee – Certificate of Indebtedness (“COI”) – Conclusive evidence clause – Burden of proof shifts to defendants once procedural requirements satisfied – Defendants raised alleged non-reflection of payments, interest miscalculation, and premature recall – Defendants failed to demonstrate manifest error or provide documentary evidence – Bare denials and speculative assertions – No bona fide triable issues raised – Summary judgment allowed.

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Muhammad Adam bin Abdullah Delivered

Counsel (4)

Lim Wei Jiet Firm Y.C. Wong Firm Lim Wei Jiet Counsel Defendant Wong Yee Chue Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

Raub Oil Mill Sdn Bhd Plaintiff Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow Defendant

Statutes Cited

Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)

Limitation Act 1953 (Cap 254)

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (12)

UK (2)

[1980] 2 All ER 92 [1996] AC 421

MY (9)

[1993] 2 MLJ 311 [2008] 4 MLJ 448 [2010] MLJU 1540 [2012] 2 MLJ 299 [2016] 3 MLJ 122 [2017] 4 CLJ 465 [2017] 4 MLJ 42 [2021] MLJU 1019 [2023] MLJU 1269

HK (1)

[2003] 3 HKC 174

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ncc-182-04-2023)