Search results
Jul 11, 2020 · The plaintiff (Government of Malaysia) entered into an agreement with the first defendant (Gurcharan Singh) as the promisor and the second and third defendants as sureties for providing a course of training at a Malayan Teacher's Training Institution.
Back in the 60s, a young fella by the name of Gurcharan Singh was given a scholarship contract by our government. The terms of the contract was that in return of the government sending young Gurcharan to be trained in the Malayan Teachers’ Training Institution, he would return and work for the government for 5 years.
This case concerns the Government of Malaysia as the plaintiff who sued Gurcharan Singh as the first defendant to promise the contract and ORS as the second and third defendant to act as the guarantors of the contract for breach of the contract made between them.
In this action, the Government Of MALAYSIA sued the first defendant as the promisor and the second and third defendants as sureties for breach of an agreement in writing entered into by them with the plaintiff for
Government OF Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh & ORS, [1971] journal. Course. Law (LAW224) 999+Documents. Students shared 4414 documents in this course. University. Universiti Teknologi MARA. Academic year:2019/2020. Uploaded by: Anonymous Student. This document has been uploaded by a student, just like you, who decided to remain anonymous.
Government of Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh & Ors [1971] 1 MLJ 211, the issue in this case was whether scholarship for a student who was a minor who attended practical training overseas amounted to contract for necessaries. The High Court held that the scholar agreement was void and unenforceable between the government and the minor.
In Government of Malaysia v. Gurcharan Singh & Ors [19711 1 211, The Government sued the first defendant (the minor) and the second and third defendants (the sureties) for breach of contract. The amount of claim was RM11,500, being the sum spent by the Government for the minor's education. At the time when the contract was made, the first
Nov 23, 2023 · In Government of Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh and Ors (1971) 1 MLJ 211, Chang Min Tat J said that: “ In my view, the word necessaries must be construed broadly
-- Malaysian High Court case of Government of Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh & Ors (1971) 1 MLJ. 3. When a demand is made by the Bank X on Surety Y as guarantor, under a guarantee which requires a demand, as a condition precedent for the liability of Surety Y, such demand should be for payment of a sum which is legally due and recoverable from the ...
Government OF Malaysia v Gurcharan Singh & ORS, [1971] 1 MLJ 211. another good case to read. Course. Social Psychology for Law (LAW036) 154Documents. Students shared 154 documents in this course. University. Universiti Teknologi MARA. Academic year:2020/2021. Uploaded by: Anonymous Student.
