1.

0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, we would like to thank Allah for the opportunity of continuing our studies
at Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Selangor, Kampus Shah Alam. Without the
power of him, we would never be here. We would also like to express our deep
appreciation to all those who provide us with the possibility to complete this assignment.
This assignment had been done with all afford by us. We always work hard to produce
good assignments with our full commitment and responsibility.

We owe a great debt of gratitude to Sir Abdul 'Izz Mohammad Kamil, our
Construction Law II lecturer, because we could not have completed this work to such a high
standard without his help. Every time we were having a tough time, he would give us sound
advice and help us out. The success of this project as a whole is directly attributable to his
initiative and help. We want to express our profound appreciation to everyone who has
contributed to the development of these concepts beyond the level of simplicity and into
something tangible. We are fortunate to have so many wonderful people in our lives who are
ready and able to share their knowledge with us.

Lastly, we want to thank our family for their endless support of us on our university
journey. We also would like to thank everyone who helped and motivated us to work on
this project.

2.0 INTRODUCTION
 A contract is an agreement that is legally binding between two or more parties, in
which one of the parties agrees to do or refrain from doing something in exchange for some
form of payment. The term "discharge of contract" refers to the process of putting an end to
the contractual relationship that existed between the two or more parties who had entered
into the contract in the past. The term "discharge of contract" refers to the situation in which
all of the rights, obligations, and duties imposed on the parties by the contract have been
satisfied. When a party is released from their obligations under a contract, the agreement
loses its capacity to produce legally enforceable results. As a consequence of this, once
the terms of a contract have been fulfilled, both parties are released from all further
obligations to the other, and the contract itself is deemed null and void.

There are two modes discharge of contract which is by performance and mutual
agreement. For discharge by performance, when one of the parties to a contract fails to
fulfil their commitments, the other party or parties may be granted a discharge by
performance. One of the more straightforward ways to get out of a contract is to do it in this
way. If the terms of the contract have been satisfactorily fulfilled by both parties, then
neither party is responsible for anything else and is released from any further duty. If one
party does not live up to their end of the bargain, the other party has the legal right to
pursue legal action against the party that did not fulfil their responsibilities.

Next is discharging contract by mutual agreement. When a contract is said to have

been terminated on mutual consent, it means that both parties have agreed to cease the
agreement at the same time. One illustration of this would be the situation in which a
customer buys an item and, after discovering that it does not meet their expectations,
sends it back to the seller within the allotted amount of time for returns. This would indicate
that the contract was terminated as a result of both parties agreeing to do so.
The case that is related: -

Name of the case T Mount Builders Sdn Bhd v Kwan Hee Wee and another appeal

Year of the case 2016

The plaintiff T Mount Builders Sdn Bhd

The defendant Kwan Hee Wee

Identification of case Malaysian Law Journal Unreported (MLJU) 1505

3.0 NAME AND IDENTIFICATION OF CASES

3.1 Name of Case

T Mount Builders Sdn Bhd v Kwan Hee Wee (2016)

The case T Mount Builders Sdn Bhd v Kwan Hee Wee (2016) was started when
Kwan Hee Wee terminate the contract with T Mount Builders (respondent) services on March
2013. On 16.11.2012, the defendant appointed the plaintiff for interior and exterior fit outworks for
their project. The plaintiff claimed that they have accepted the defendant’s work order on
28.11.2012 which fixed the contract sum at RM2,614,250.00. After the plaintiff already completed
their mock up, the defendant told the plaintiff to stop the work and terminated their services without
any explanation. The plaintiff invoices the defendant for preliminary works to the value of
RM968,846.00. The defendant refused to pay so that the plaintiff sued. The defendant refused to
pay because there was no valid contract. The work order that sends to the plaintiff is the dummy set
and the defendant claimed that the plaintiff did not sign and return the work order. Hence the
plaintiff’s appointment was unconfirmed. The first issue, the session court found that the plaintiff
had failed to provide conclusive evidence that the work had been finalized and the claimed amount
RM968,846.00 are not approved. Despite making the findings, the court decides to award damages
in the sum of RM70,000.00 to the plaintiff. However, the defendant was unhappy over the decision
because the amount of RM70,000 as “nominal damages” is too high and excessive.

3.2 Identification Of Case

The code of Malaysian Law Journal that was used for the case of T Mount Builders Sdn
Bhd v Kwan Hee Wee and another appeal (2016) is a Malaysia Law Journal 1505, Federal Court,
Putrajaya, Ahmad Maarop CM, Zainun Ali, Ramly Ali Balia Yusof Haji Wahi and Mohd Zawawi
Salleh FCJJ. Rayuan sivil NO.02(f)-2-01/2016(w) on August 1 2016 (T Mount Builders Sdn Bhd
v Kwan Hee Wee and another appeal, 2016).