COMPANY LOSES SUIT AGAINST UMNO

PUTRAJAYA, Aug 25 (Bernama) -- A merchandise supplier which sued United Malays
National Organisation (Umno) for RM218 million (US$69.24 million) for
non-payment over the supply of election paraphernalia during the 2004 general
election, lost its appeal to reinstate its civil suit against the party.

The Federal Court today dismissed Elegant Advisory Sdn Bhd's leave
application to appeal over the Court of Appeal decision in affirming the High
Court's ruling.

On Sept 10 last year, the Kuala Lumpur High Court allowed Umno's application to
strike out the suit on the grounds that it did not follow the Contracts Act
1950. Umno is the political party leading the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional
(BN).

Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum, who presided over the
hearing, said there was no question of law for argument for the Federal Court to
determine as stated under Section 96 of Courts of Judicature Act 1964, for the
court to grant the leave.

However, he advised the company as a 'middle-man' (main contactor) with the
sub-contractors to execute the contract agreement properly through signing of an
agreement before proceeding with any project.

He said the company was lucky in that it was not sued by the
sub-contractors, to which the company's lawyer, Yusfarizal Yusof, replied "not yet".

Malanjum, who sat with Federal Court judges Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin and Md
Raus Sharif, ordered the company to pay RM2,500 (US$793.73) as legal costs to
Umno.

In the suit, the company initially named former Umno treasurer Abdul Azim Mohd
Zabidi as defendant, but his name was replaced with that of former Umno
administration and finance secretary Ishak Abdul Rahman after the High Court
allowed the company's application to amend the name of the defendant in the suit
last year.

In its writ of summons, Elegant Advisory claimed that it was involved in
supplying election merchandise, transportation and publications, and had
supplied Umno with the items for the 11th general election in 2004.

The company claimed that it had sent invoices for RM218,013,475 and that the
defendant had failed to pay up.

At the outset, Yusfarizal submitted there was an oral contract between the
company and Umno, and that the goods had been delivered and used by Umno.

He told the court that the respondent also pleaded that they had received four
delivery orders of the goods.

He said the company and Umno had discussed settling the case out of court, and
reasoned that if there was no contract, why the respondent wanted to settle the
case.

Yusfarizal submitted that Umno had paid RM8 million to four sub-contractors
appointed by the main contractor, Elegant Advisory, for the project based on the
delivery orders but refused to pay the amount sought by the main contractor.

Counsel Mohd Hafarizam Harun, representing Umno, replied there was no new issue
of law raised by the company for the court to grant leave.

He said the company had also failed to furnish the terms of oral contact between
both parties, in the statement of claim, or by way of affidavit. (US$1=RM3.14)
-- BERNAMA



Delete & Prev | Delete & Next