A three-member bench chaired by Justice Wong Kian Kheong ruled that the brewery’s counterclaim against Thirsty Monkeys Bar and Restaurant Sdn Bhd had no basis.

“The sessions court and High Court, in allowing the counterclaim, made an error of fact in finding that Thirsty Monkeys had breached a sponsorship agreement,” he said.

Wong, sitting with Justices Ong Chee Kuan and Aliza Sulaiman, held that Heineken’s claim for loss of profits was unfounded as the sponsorship agreement was not a supply agreement.

He said the brewery’s claim for loss of profits, made under Section 74 of the Contracts Act, was unsustainable.

The court ordered that the money paid by Thirsty Monkeys be refunded with 5% interest, calculated from today until the final settlement.

Heineken was also ordered to pay the plaintiff RM40,000 in costs.

Thirsty Monkeys entered into a sponsorship agreement with Heineken on April 27, 2018, under which it agreed to exclusively sell, promote and market Heineken’s products.

However, Heineken claimed that Thirsty Monkeys repudiated the agreement and was obliged to refund the sponsorship sum and loss of profits.

In its counterclaim, Heineken alleged that Thirsty Monkeys had sold products from its competitor, Carlsberg.

Thirsty Monkeys said that on Jan 29, 2019, Heineken terminated the sponsorship agreement by removing its specialised beer taps and advertising materials.

The company then filed a suit in the sessions court, which was dismissed in February 2022. The court also allowed Heineken’s counterclaim for RM195,000.

In July 2022, the High Court affirmed the lower court’s decision, giving rise to the present appeal.

Counsel GK Ganesan, KN Geetha, TP Vaani and JN Lheela appeared for Thirsty Monkeys, while Joshua Chong and Dewi Jasmine Amalina Ahmad represented Heineken.