8/9/2019 Charles Grenier Sdn Bhd v Lau Wing Ho

1/3

CHARLES GRENIER SDN BHD v LAU WING HO.

Held, dismissing the appeal! "!#

An ag$eement t% ma&e an ag$eement d%es n%t $es'lt in a (%nt$a(t. It is )%$ the (%'$t

in ea(h (ase t% (%nst$'e the (%$$esp%nden(e e*(hanged +eteen the pa$ties and t%sa- hethe$ that is the $es'lt intended +- the pa$ties. I) the (%'$t $ea(hes an %pp%site

(%n(l'si%n, then the$e is an en)%$(ea+le (%nt$a(t "see p /C#.

0 "0#

1he la leans in )av%'$ %) 'ph%lding +a$gains and n%t in st$i&ing them d%n "see p/E23#4 Hillas 5 C% v A$(%s Ltd 6!708 All ER Rep 979 )%ll%ed.

"#

1he (%'$t had e*amined the t% lette$s that passed +eteen the pa$ties, and as

'na+le t% )ind that the pa$ties intended that the$e sh%'ld +e n% (%n(l'ded (%nt$a(t

'ntil a )%$mal sale and p'$(hase ag$eement had +een e*e('ted +- them. On the(%nt$a$-, the (%'$t )%'nd thei$ %+:e(tive intenti%n t% +e t$avelling in ;'ite the

%pp%site di$e(ti%n. 1he- had identi)ied the pa$ties t% the t$ansa(ti%n, the p$%pe$t-, the p$i(e and the te$ms the- (%nside$ed essential ith s'))i(ient (la$it-. S'(h an

ag$eement as te$med an

8/9/2019 Charles Grenier Sdn Bhd v Lau Wing Ho

2/3

A AH 1HEA1RE SDN BHD v 1AN LA SOO.

Held, all%ing the appeal

= "!#

1he$e as n% (%nt$a(t at all, +e(a'se the said d%('ment as dependent %n thesigning %) a )%$mal (%nt$a(t t% +e )'$the$ neg%tiated and app$%ved +- +%th pa$ties.

1he p$%vis% in the said d%('ment as ve$- simila$ t% the ph$ase %$ )%$m'la %)

8/9/2019 Charles Grenier Sdn Bhd v Lau Wing Ho

3/3

! "/#

1he s'm %) R0.9@m, paid +- the $esp%ndent t% the (ha$gee, as t% +e $e)'nded +-

the appellant t% the $esp%ndent, ith inte$est at =./pa the$e%n )$%m the date %) the$esp%ndent