Law Moot Competition 2013/2014 Planner

Official Timetable for Law Moot Competition 2013/2014

Date                                                 

5^th September 2013                                            Briefing to the Participants

5 - 8^th September 2013                                      Registration                 

9^th September 2013                                            Draw Lots
13^th September 2013                                          Publication of Video and Publication of Pairing List

7^th October 2013                                                Publication of Moot Question for Preliminary Round, Rules and Regulations and Formats for Memorial

29^th October 2013                                              Due Date for Submission of           Problem Clarification

31^st October 2013                                              Release of Problem Clarification Answer

4^th November 2013                                            Submission of Memorial

6^th November 2013                                            Exchange of Memorial

21 – 23th November 2013                                 Preliminary Round of Law Moot Competition

25^th November 2013                                          Finalise the Preliminary Round Results (Witness by Lecturers)

28^th November 2013                                          Release the Results for Preliminary Round

2^nd December 2013                                            Publication of Grand Final Moot Question

5^th December 2013                                             Due Date for Submission of Grand Final Problem Clarification

9^th December 2013                                             Release of Problem Clarification Answer

26^th December 2013                                           Submission and Exchange of Grand Final Memorials

27^th December 2013                                           Sending the Memorials to Judges

4^th January 2014                                                 Final Round of Law Moot Competition

Dear Participants,


Final Round will be held as follows:

English Moot Competition

Date: 12^th January 2013 (Saturday)

Time: 8.30am-11.30am

Venue: Multimedia University Moot Court

Bahasa Malaysia Moot Competition and Award Ceremonies

Date: 12^th January 2013 (Saturday)

Time: 12.30pm- 4.00pm

Venue: Multimedia University Moot Court

Thank you.

Regards,
Organizing Committee of Law Moot Competition 2012/2013

Pertandingan Mut Universiti Multimedia (Pusingan Akhir) Penjelasan Masalah

Pasangan 18

1.      Di dalam kontrak yang telah dimateraikan antara Rahmat Bulat Sdn. Bhd. and Rajesh Sinar Sdn. Bhd.,  adakah perjanjian tersebut mengandung sebarang klausa atau peruntukan untuk pelucuthakan deposit?

Terpulang kepada andaian Mooters.

2.      Adakah pinjaman atau bantuan daripada institusi kewangan merupakan satu syarat yang telah dipersetujui oleh kedua-dua pihak?

Terpulang kepada andaian Mooters.

3.      Bilakah polisi Bank Negara Malaysia terhadap sektor harta benda luas dikuatkuasakan?

Terpulang kepada andaian Mooters.

4.      Adakah keputusan hakim yang bijaksana di Mahkamah Tinggi hanya berdasarkan klausa 10.1?

Berdasarkan fakta kes yang telah diberikan, ya dan juga sila rujuk kepada Keputusan Hakim yang mahu dirayu oleh Perayu.

Pasangan 23

1.      Adakah jumlah sebanyak RM300,000.00 itu adalah jumlah daripada 10% deposit + 3 kali ansuran ataupun ianya jumlah 3 kali ansuran?

Amaun yang diberikan adalah jumlah keseluruhan 3 kali ansuran yang telah dibayar (RM300,000.00). Deposit yang telah dibayar pula adalah sebanyak 10% daripada harga belian tanah.

2.      Adakah RB mematuhi peraturan Bank Negara semasa membuat pinjaman?

Rujuk kepada fakta kes dan alasan-alasan rayuan, sekiranya RB berjaya memenuhi peraturan BNM, masih ada pecah kontrak? Namun begitu, mooters boleh membuat andaian sebaliknya bersama alasan yang kukuh.

3.      Pihak manakah yang menghadapi masalah kecairan?Negara,RB ataupun yang lain-lain?

Pihak mana yang perlu membuat pinjaman? Rujuk pada fakta kes.

4.      Mengapakah RB menegaskan bahawa mereka telah terlepas daripada meneruskan perjanjian itu secara sah?

Terpulang kepada andaian/hujahan mooters berdasarkan alasan rayuan.

5.      Adakah perjanjian yang ditandatangani antara RB dan RS pernah mengatakan bahawa RB akan membeli tanah tersebut dengan mendapatkan pinjaman daripada institusi-institusi kewangan?

Sila rujuk fakta kes yang mana pernyataan tersebut tiada dinyatakan, namun Mooters boleh membuat andaian sebagaimana perlu.

6.      Adakah kedua- dua pihak penjanji terikat dengan perjanjian yang ditandatangani pada 31 Mac 2010?

Mooters boleh membuat andaian sebagaimana perlu.

7.       Selepas pembayaran deposit (10%), RS telah membayarkan tiga (3) kali ansuran berjumlah RM300,000.00 daripada harga belian, apakah jumlah yang berkenaan pada setiap kali ansuran yang telah dibayarkan, terutamanya, kepada ansuran pertama dan ansuran ketiga?

Kurang faham dengan soalan mooters tetapi, RM300,000.00 adalah jumlah keseluruhan 3 kali ansuran pembayaran. Andaian boleh dibuat jika perlu.

8.      Adakah perlucutan deposit dan ganti rugi yang diawardkan di bawah klausa 10.1 perjanjian, (iaitu, perlucutan ansuran pertama dan 11% kepada ansuran ketiga) adalah sama ataupun berbeza?

Berdasarkan fakta kes, tidak. Peghakiman Hakim kepada RS adalah deposit 10% menjadi hak RS serta award dibwh klausa 10.1 iaitu gantirugi yg dikira sebyk 11% dari ansuran ketiga.

9.      Merujuk kepada klausa 10.1 dalam perjanjian, penjual berhak untuk membatalkan ansuran pertama dan jumlah yang bersamaan kepada sebelas peratus (11%) setahun atas ansuran yang ketiga atau sebahagian daripadanya yang belum dibayar / terkumpul dikira dari tarikh tamat.. Atas pemahaman saya, ansuran pertama hingga ketiga adalah yang telah dibayar oleh pembeli, tetapi apa yang telah dimaksudkan merujuk kepada “atau sebahagian daripadanya yang belum dibayar / terkumpul”, Sila jelaskan.

Sila rujuk kepada klausa 10.1 didalam fakta kes. Klausa tersebut menyatakan bahawa, sekiranya terdapat perlanggaran oleh pembeli di dalam apa2 peruntukan perjanjian, penjual berhak untuk membatalkan ansuran yg pertama dan jumlah yang bersamaan kepada sebelas peratus (11%) setahun atas ansuran yang 3 atau ke atas ansuran yang masih belum berbayar. Mengikut fakta kes, anusran telah dibayar sebanyak 3 kali. Maka, 11% tadi adalah utk ansuran yg ketiga. Ambil perhatian atas kehendak Notis di dalam Klausa 10.1.

Multimedia University Law Moot Competition (Finals) Problem Clarifications

Team 13

1.      "RS agreed to sell and RB agreed to purchase 1,140.40 acres of land in Mukim Melaka Tengah in the state of Melaka for a price of RM3,000,000.00. After payment of the deposit (10%) and three 3 instalments amounting to RM300,000.00 towards the purchase price,"

               Regarding to this statement, it does not sound to be correct as :

·                    10% deposit of RM 3,000,000 should be rm300,000.00

 Since they say After payment of the deposit (10%) and three 3 instalments amounting to RM300,000.00, then shouldnt the amount should be more than RM300,000.00?  

2.      Deposit + 3 installments = ?
RM300,000+ (unknown installment) = more than RM300,000 , isn’t it?

3.      If the amount written above is correct or wrong, what’s the amount of installments paid?

4.      What is the amount of installment paid for third instalment? and what is the deposit then, if the amount stated is wrong?

The deposit is 10% from the Purchase Price. Thus, it is RM300,000.00. The figure of RM300,000.00 given in the paragraph is only for the total amount for three instalments paid. Thus, back to the facts given, the amount that has been paid is more than RM300,000.00.  You may assume how much the payment of the 3^rd instalments.

5.      “Be entitled to forfeit the first instalment and the sum equivalent to eleven per centum (11%) per annum on the third instalment or portion thereof remaining unpaid/outstanding calculated from the due date until the date of such forfeiture by way of agreed liquidated damages”

 the word 'or' here does it mean that the 11% could either be thereof the 3rd installment OR the outstanding unpaid amount?

It means both. But since 3 instalment has been made, thus, the interest is given against the 3^rd instalment (look at judgment given by Court)

6.      Did the Bank Negara issue any terms and conditions for Loan, in terms of requirements? if so, what are they?

You may do some research on this one.

7.      What is the date of the BNM issue of restriction?

Assumption can be made.

Moot Problem Final Round (English)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA

AT PUTRAJAYA

[APPELLATE JURISDICTION]

MOOT NO. OF 2012

BETWEEN

RAHMAT BULAT SDN. BHD. APPELLANT

AND

RAJESH SINAR SDN. BHD. RESPONDENT

Rahmat Bulat Sdn. Bhd (RB), a housing developer signed a sale and purchase agreement (“the agreement”) with Rajesh Sinar Sdn. Bhd. (RS). In the agreement signed by both parties on 31 March 2010, RS agreed to sell and RB agreed to purchase 1,140.40 acres of land in Mukim Melaka Tengah in the state of Melaka for a price of RM3,000,000.00. After payment of the deposit (10%) and three 3 instalments amounting to RM300,000.00 towards the purchase price, in a few months time RB informed RS that they had failed to obtain a loan to pay the balance of the purchase price from any financial institution. RB also argued that they had been lawfully discharged from further performance of the agreement. RS insisted on receiving the full balance of the purchase price.

RB then commenced proceedings in the High Court for a declaration that the contract had been frustrated and consequently RB was discharged from its obligation to perform the contract. RB also sought refund of all monies paid under the contract. RS filed a counter-claim and sought for an order of specific performance of the contract, compensation or damages in addition to the order of specific performance or alternatively, damages for breach of the contract in lieu of specific performance. The learned judge dismissed RB's claims with costs. The learned judge, however, did not make an order for specific performance but in lieu, he awarded RS damages under cl 10.1 of the agreement. which read as follows:

10.1Default By The Purchaser

In the event of any breach by the purchaser of any of the provisions of this agreement the vendor shall (subject to and after the expiry of a notice in writing to the purchaser requiring the purchaser to remedy such breach(es) within thirty (30) days from the date thereof provided always that such notice is only necessary if the breach(es) does/do not involve the payment of the second instalment or the third instalment) be entitled to forfeit the first instalment and the sum equivalent to eleven per centum (11%) per annum on the third instalment or portion thereof remaining unpaid/outstanding calculated from the due date until the date of such forfeiture by way of agreed liquidated damages and the vendor's solicitors shall refund to the purchaser all other monies paid by the purchaser towards the purchase of the land (free of interest) in exchange for the titles whereupon this agreement shall terminate and cease to be of any further effect but without prejudice

to any right which either party may be entitled to against the other party in respect of any antecedent breach of this agreement.

The Learned Judge ordered the forfeiture of the deposit and a further sum of equivalent to 11%pa on the third instalment. RB challenged the trial judge's decision on the issues of frustration of the contract, the issue of RS's claims in the pleadings and the agreed liquidated damages under clause 10.1 of the agreement,

RB appealed on the grounds that:

i. the failure to obtain a loan to pay the balance of the purchase price due to the liquidity problem and Bank Negara ruling on lending to the broad property Sector was a supervening event beyond the control of the appellant.

ii. the liquidated damages awarded under cl 10.1 of the agreement is extravagant, exorbitant and unconscionable.