{"id":5992,"date":"2025-11-16T12:56:51","date_gmt":"2025-11-16T04:56:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?p=5992"},"modified":"2025-11-16T12:56:53","modified_gmt":"2025-11-16T04:56:53","slug":"breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/","title":{"rendered":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

1. Summary and Facts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, UKM entered a laundry services contract with Edgenta for PPUKM, requiring Edgenta to maintain a \u201cfive par\u201d linen level \u2013 laundry service contract. UKM claimed Edgenta failed to supply new linens and imposed penalties of RM3,996,344.47 based on missing items, price per item, and days delayed. Edgenta argued the contract did not specify \u201cnew\u201d linens, supplied a mix of linens, disputed the penalty formula, and alleged UKM increased linen requirements without notice, counterclaiming RM3.64 million for wrongful deductions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Legal Issues<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 Whether the defendant was contractually obligated to supply new linens rather than used or recycled linens.
\u2022 Whether the defendant\u2019s counterclaim for allegedly wrongful deductions had any basis or merit.
\u2022 Whether the plaintiff\u2019s penalty calculation method and amount were valid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. Court\u2019s Findings<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 The High Court allowed UKM\u2019s claim for RM3,996,344.47 with interest at 5% per annum from the date of filing until full settlement and dismissed Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim with costs.
\u2022 It was held that when a dispute arises from a contract, the entire contract must be interpreted considering its factual background, commercial purpose, and business nature to determine the parties\u2019 intention using an objective approach.
\u2022 Although the contract did not expressly include the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court found that both parties intended and understood that only new linens were required.
\u2022 The Court admitted extrinsic evidence under proviso (b) to section 92 of the Evidence Act 1950, holding that parol evidence was admissible to clarify a contractual silence where it was not inconsistent with the written terms.
\u2022 Key documents, including meeting minutes and correspondence, showed that the defendant had repeatedly acknowledged its obligation to supply \u201cnew linens\u201d and sought extensions of time to meet this requirement.
\u2022 The penalty formula was valid, as the phrase \u201cuntil the five par requirements is fulfilled\u201d clearly included a time element.
\u2022 The counterclaims by the Defendant lacked evidence and appeared tactical after receiving the Plaintiff\u2019s penalty demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4. Practical Implications<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

This decision affirms several important legal principles including:
\u2022 Even if a contract is silent, courts may infer intent from surrounding evidence and commercial sense.
\u2022 Parol evidence rule allows clarification of silent terms (s 92(b) Evidence Act 1950).
\u2022 Penalty clauses are enforceable if they serve a legitimate commercial purpose and are reasonable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5993,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1568],"tags":[3726,2286,3724,3727,3725],"class_list":["post-5992","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-contract-law","tag-commercial-interpretation","tag-contract-law","tag-evidence-act","tag-high-court-malaysia","tag-penalty-clause"],"yoast_head":"\nBREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"zh_TW\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"630\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u4f5c\u8005:\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"\u9810\u4f30\u95b1\u8b80\u6642\u9593\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\"},\"headline\":\"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":395,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/breachofcontract00.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Commercial Interpretation\",\"contract law\",\"Evidence Act\",\"High Court Malaysia\",\"Penalty Clause\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Contract Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"zh-TW\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/\",\"name\":\"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/breachofcontract00.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00\",\"description\":\"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"zh-TW\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"zh-TW\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/breachofcontract00.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/breachofcontract00.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":630},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"description\":\"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"zh-TW\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"zh-TW\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"width\":2080,\"height\":369,\"caption\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/yhalaw\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\",\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/","og_locale":"zh_TW","og_type":"article","og_title":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","og_description":"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.","og_url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/","og_site_name":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw","article_published_time":"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":630,"url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"YHA Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u4f5c\u8005:":"YHA Admin","\u9810\u4f30\u95b1\u8b80\u6642\u9593":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/"},"author":{"name":"YHA Admin","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef"},"headline":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL","datePublished":"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/"},"wordCount":395,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg","keywords":["Commercial Interpretation","contract law","Evidence Act","High Court Malaysia","Penalty Clause"],"articleSection":["Contract Law"],"inLanguage":"zh-TW"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/","name":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL | Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg","datePublished":"2025-11-16T04:56:51+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-16T04:56:53+00:00","description":"In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia v Edgenta Facilities Management Sdn Bhd [2025] 11 MLJ 783, the High Court held that Edgenta breached its laundry services contract with UKM by failing to supply new linens as intended under the agreement. Although the contract did not explicitly use the word \u201cnew,\u201d the Court admitted extrinsic evidence under section 92(b) of the Evidence Act 1950 to establish both parties\u2019 common understanding. The Court also upheld UKM\u2019s RM3.99 million penalty as valid and proportionate, finding that the formula including \u201cdays delayed\u201d was consistent with the contract and served a legitimate commercial purpose. Edgenta\u2019s counterclaim for wrongful deductions was dismissed for lack of proof.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"zh-TW","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"zh-TW","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/breachofcontract00.jpg","width":1200,"height":630},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/breach-of-contract-court-finds-edgenta-in-breach-supplying-used-linens-not-good-enough-for-ukm-hospital\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"BREACH OF CONTRACT \u2013 COURT FINDS EDGENTA IN BREACH: SUPPLYING USED LINENS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR UKM HOSPITAL"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","name":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"zh-TW"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization","name":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"zh-TW","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","width":2080,"height":369,"caption":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef","name":"YHA Admin","sameAs":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5992"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5992"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5992\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5994,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5992\/revisions\/5994"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5993"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5992"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5992"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5992"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}