VISI MELATI SDN BHD v SPNB ASPIRASI SENDIRIAN BERHAD
Catchwords
The High Court on 16.12.2020 affirmed by the Court of Appeal on 25.8.2023 found in favour of the Plaintiff on liability, holding that the Development Agreement was not rescinded and conditions precedent were fulfilled. The prayer for specific performance was dismissed. The Defendant’s counterclaim was dismissed with costs. Based on the assessment of damages conducted by this Court as stipulated above, this Court orders the following the Defendant pays to the Plaintiff the following: (i) For Land Costs – In this Court’s considered opinion, premised on the above, only nominal damages is allowed. Without uncertainty, the Plaintiff has proven that a right had been infringed (the fact of damage), it only failed to prove the specific amount of loss or failed to make the necessary proper election. In the present case, the Plaintiff has identified and proven on a balance of probabilities, the sum of RM4,876,272.40 as its total wasted expenditure/costs that comprises of: - Forfeited 10% deposit: RM4,068,495.00 - Late payment interest: RM753,227.40 - Legal fees: RM54,550.00 (ii) Construction Costs – nominal damages of RM100,000.00. Following the approach in Delpuri Harl (supra) where an excessive and speculative profit claim was rejected in favour of a recognition of the breach, this Court awards only nominal damages for Constructions Costs which acknowledge the legal wrong without granting the Plaintiff an unearned windfall. (iii) Interest of 5% on the judgment calculated from today until the date of full and final settlement (iv) Costs of this assessment proceedings in the sum of RM35,000.00 subject to allocator keywords : nominal damages, land costs, construction costs
Judges (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (wa-22ncvc-258-05-2018)