Lac4443

Commercial
law
Case Review

AUFA DI NA BI NT I S UHARDI

11 908 03
 introduction
 Determine how Malaysian lawyers and organisations use
legislation to settle various types of problems and concerns that
have recently occurred in Malaysia
 Facts such as how the court handled the matter and what
procedures the court used to establish which party was proper
are critical in maintaining the fairness of Malaysian law or
norms.
 SALES OF
GOODS
MENSA MErCANTILE (FAR EAST) PTE LTD V EIKOBINA (M) SDN BHD
(1989) 2 MLJ 170
 A contract whereby the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the
buyer for a price

 A contract of sale may be absolute or conditional where under a contract of sale the
property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer.

 the transfer of the property in the goods is to take place at a future time or subject to some
condition thereafter to be fulfilled.

 An agreement to sell becomes a sale when the time elapses or the conditions are fulfilled
subject to which the property in the goods is to be transferred.
 FACTS OF THE CASES
On May 6, 1987, the defendant agreed to sell some secondhand heavy construction machines
to the plaintiff for 92.5 million yen in a memorandum the memorandum was silent when the
plaintiff was supposed to pay the purchase price and then the defendant was supposed to
deliver the machines

The plaintiff subsequently launched the current lawsuit an order for particular performance
of the memorandum on the grounds that the defendant had breached its responsibilities the
defendant did noticed the plaintiff it was willing to accept payment and to deliver the
machines to the plaintiff on or before 22 July 1987 but then there were no such payment was
made by that date on July 7, 1987, The defendant had written the plaintiff a letter, stating that
payment will be made on July 22, 1987

the plaintiff had been making unreasonable requests which is causing the agreement to be
delayed the date

Defendant also argued that the 14-day payment time stated in the letter was reasonable.
 FACTS OF THE CASES
On July 18, 1987, the plaintiff wrote to the defendant claiming that it agreed to abide by the
conditions of the memorandum but only until the date of payment

the plaintiff requested that it be granted a week's notice to pay and agreed to pay by 27 July 1987
because this was a change to the defendant's original payment date

changes to the defendant's original payment date, indicate the plaintiff in the letter that unless the
plaintiff hears or not it will assume that the defendant agreed to the new payment date.

the purchase price was reasonable with notice that allowing a grace period of seven to ten days to
make payment of such a significant sum

the defendant considered the plaintiff's failure to pay as a wrongful repudiation of the
memorandum.

the plaintiff claiming that payment will be made at 12 noon on July 27, 1987. When the money
was presented on the scheduled date, the defendant refused to accept it

The plaintiff professed that having decided to buy that machines it had advertised in public and
sell the same machines to the third parties
ISSUE OF THE CASE
I n t hi s case i n vol vi n g t he sal e of go ods

 whet her p ar t i cul ar p er f or mance was t h e r i g ht remed y

 Wh et h er damages on t h e p ro per t y wer e su ffi ci en t en ou gh

 COURT DECISION
(HELD)
COURT DECI SI ON gr ant i n g t he ap peal of t h e ap pel l ant wi t h cost s

1. the court has the authority to evaluate all of the case's surrounding circumstances to assessing
the sort of goods in question

2. when such obligations were accrued before the subject matter of the sales came into the
plaintiff's possession, the plaintiff's commitments to third parties cannot be used to support a
decree of specific performance.

3. it must show that the machines were not widely available on the market if the plaintiff can
establish anything and also as a result the machines were of special interest and worth to it.
THANK
YOU