American Government Journal Three
Right to file lawsuit.
Justice
Justice delayed is justice denied…
Business Law: Jurisdiction Case on Negligence
A short summary of a business law case and the correct way to solve it.
Damages for Infringement of Copy Rights
In an action for infringement of copyright it is not necessary to give proof of actual damage; the damages are at large.
Slow Legal System
Is the rule nine order 13 of CPC sufficient and suitable for practice? a common problem …
Mode and Manner of Making of Oath
The making of oath by the plaintiff is equivalent of an offer to and ultimate taking oath by the plaintiff…
Deduct LAD Amount From Performance Bond
There is another issue to be tried in the performance bond whether the plaintiff could claim LAD from the defendant as certified by the architect and whether the plaintiff could deduct the amount from the bank guarantee. In the case Pekeliling Triangle Sdn Bhd v. Chase Perdana Berhad,( MLJU 511,20002)the plaintiff in this case made an application for an interim injunction restraining the defendant or its agent from withdrawing a sum amounting to RM55, 836,000.00 from bank. Therefore, the plaintiff had to show the existence of serious questions to be tried. The stated amount was sought by the plaintiff not to be released from the bank.
Breach The Contract
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s application because the determining issue whether the plaintiff or the defendant had breached the contract was not an issue. It was not proper if equitable consideration was used to restrain a beneficiary from claiming profit under a performance bond except where there is fraud. In this case, the issue of fraud was not raised. The plaintiff’s allegation that the defendant was indebted to them which was considered by the defendant as a serious matter should be adjudicated between them. As such, the court could not see how the balance of adaptability favoured the injunction prayed for.
Remedies in Damages are Adequate
The question whether or not an injunction should be granted was determined solely by asking such questions as these. Is the plaintiff’s undertaking in damages adequate? Is remedy in damages against the defendants adequate?
The Tale and Rule Lay Down in Michael V. Hart & Co. 1901
The plaintiff was entitled to the highest prices which were obtainable during the period during which he had the option of selling.










