Agreement To Agree Malaysia

It relied on its argument on the phrase “mutually agreed” and argued that the contract had failed because the delivery dates, a key issue, had not been agreed between the parties and had been agreed in the future. In other words, the option agreement was an unenforceable “agreement agreement”. It also argued that it had not rejected or abandoned the option agreement. The courts have also accepted the conduct of the parties within a given industry. In Ajwa for Food Industries Co (MIGOP), Eygpt vs. Pacific Inter-Link Sdn Bhd [2013] 5 MLRA 85, the absence of signatures in a sales contract did not preclude it from being a valid and enforceable contract. .


Comments are closed.