In brief
Malaysia is set to undertake the most significant overhaul of its contract law framework in over 70 years following the release of the Final Report by the Committee for the Review and Reform of Contract Law (CRRCL). The Report recommends targeted reforms to modernise the Contracts Act 1950 while preserving its core structure, addressing developments in digital commerce, AI-assisted contracting and modern commercial practices.
The Final Report has been completed and presented to members of Parliament for review. It is targeted for official tabling in the Dewan Rakyat.
Structural reform in three parts
The Report recommends reform in three parts, as elaborated below.
Part 1 - A targeted and measured first part.
A measured update to modernise the existing Contracts Act 1950 while preserving established principles. Foundational amendment to Section 1 confirms that the Act is not a complete Code and common law principles continue to supplement the Act. A new Part XI on Exemption and Limitation Clauses is also proposed. For example, references to contracts becoming "voidable" for breach are replaced with the more precise concept of termination.
Part 2 - An elaboration made in the second part.
Part X (Agency) of the Contracts Act 1950 is proposed to be repealed and replaced with a standalone Agency Bill providing a more comprehensive and modern framework, and which touches on Artificial Intelligence. Details of this will not be touched on this Alert.
Part 3 - A completely new regime in third part.
The third part contains the proposed Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Bill and supporting analysis. This is a new statutory regime allowing third parties to enforce contractual rights in specified circumstances.
Contract formation (Sections 6, 7)
The proposed amendments:
- Clarify that where an offer prescribes a mode of acceptance, acceptance must generally comply with that requirement, a non-compliant acceptance will not bind the offeror unless expressly accepted
- Recognise that revocation may be communicated by or on behalf of the offeror, aligning the Act with established principles of agency
- Introduce a new Section 26B confirming that agreements made without an intention to create legal relations are void. While this principle is already recognised under common law, its inclusion in the Act gives it explicit statutory recognition and greater certainty.
Consideration and separability (Sections 25, 26, 26A-26B)
A new Section 26A would provide that performing, or promising to perform, an existing contractual obligation can constitute valid consideration for a contract variation. This facilitates commercially practical renegotiations without requiring fresh consideration.
Free consent (Sections 14 -16A, 19 , 20)
The reforms expand the circumstances in which consent is not considered free by introducing:
- Duress - The concept of "coercion" is replaced by "Duress" in s15, expanding the doctrine to include economic dress and other forms of illegitimate pressure. Factors to consider include:
a. The nature of the threat or demand
b. The reasonableness or otherwise of the demand
c. The presence or absence of protest at the time
d. The availability of alternatives or legal remedies
e. Whether independent advice was obtained
f. Whether steps were taken to avoid the contract thereafter
- Unconscionable Dealing – this is introduced in s16A to address situations of unfair advantage, such as taking and exploitation that falls short of undue influence. Factors to be considered include unequal bargaining power, unfair tactics, exploitation of vulnerability, and unreasonable contractual conditions.
The introduction of duress and unconscionable dealing creates additional grounds for challenging contracts beyond undue influence, fraud and misrepresentation, while corresponding amendments to sections 14, 19 and 20 align the treatment of all vitiating factors and clarify the remedies available. The reforms also expand the courts' powers to grant restitutionary and ancillary relief, including payment of money, return or repair of goods, provision of services, and any other relief considered just in the circumstances.
Mistake of fact (Section 21)
The proposed amendment narrows the circumstances in which a contract may be declared void for common mistake. A contract will only be void where both parties are mistaken about an essential fact and that fact is not the subject of a warranty given by one of the parties. A new definition of "warranty" is also introduced, and the amendment expressly confirms that a mistaken view as to the value of the subject matter does not amount to a mistake of fact.
Restraint of trade- possible (Section 28)
One of the most significant commercial reforms is the proposed replacement of Malaysia's current stringent restraint of trade rule with a reasonableness test. Restraints may be enforceable if they are reasonable in duration, reasonable in geographical scope, reasonable in activities restricted, and necessary to protect legitimate business interests.
Quantum (Sections 73A, 74, 74A, 75)
- The existing provision for compensation for a party who rescinds a contract has been relocated to a new Section 73A, and the usage of "terminate" is used to ensure consistency with terminology used across the amended Act.
- Section 74 clarifies principles governing compensation for breach of contract and now confirms that recoverable loss includes damage which arises naturally in the usual course of things, or which the parties knew or could reasonably have contemplated at the time of contracting.
- The requirement to Mitigate is now expressly codified, i.e., that the failure of the claimant to take reasonable steps to mitigate loss or damage shall be taken into account in assessing compensation.
- A new Section 74A provides compensation for non-contractual obligations to be similar to that of contractual ones. This was previously in the old Section 74 and has now been separated for clarity and coherence.
- Section 75 is revised to clarify the law on agreed damages and penalty clause. The provision confirms that:
a. A claimant is entitled only to Reasonable compensation, regardless of the amount stipulated in the contract.
b. The claimant must demonstrate that the amount sought is not exorbitant or disproportionate to the greatest legitimate loss suffered, whilst ensuring any award does not exceed the sum stipulated in the contract.
The provision also clarifies that a deposit may be forfeited, provided that the amount forfeited is reasonable. The existing exception relating to bail-bonds and similar instruments has been retained.
Exemption and limitation clauses (Part XI, Sections 192- 206)
A new Part XI is introduced, modelled on the UK's Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA). The regime provides that certain liabilities cannot be excluded by contract e.g., those arising from death or personal injury due to negligence and supply of goods without title. In other cases, the enforceability of exclusion or limitation clauses is subject to a statutory requirement of reasonableness, with a non-exhaustive list of factors to guide its application.
The use of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts, misrepresentation, contractors for the supply of goods are addressed alongside provisions to prevent circumvention of statutory controls. It is intended to complement, rather than replace, existing legislation such as consumer protection laws.
Restraint of legal proceedings (Section 29)
Section 29 is simplified to provide that any agreement which absolutely restricts a party from enforcing his/ her rights under a contract by the usual legal proceedings is void to that extent.
The proposed amendment to Section 29 removes the current prohibition relating to Limitation, i.e., contractual provisions limiting the time within which parties may enforce their rights and detailed arbitration-related exceptions. These matters are therefore left to be governed by the applicable statutory framework (i.e., the Limitation Act and Arbitration Act). This recognises that parties may legitimately agree on contractual time limits for bringing claims, particularly where such arrangements are negotiated freely and between parties of comparable bargaining strength.
Third-party rights
The proposed Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Bill marks a significant shift from the traditional doctrine of privity by allowing intended third-party beneficiaries to directly enforce contractual terms in certain circumstances.
A third party is able to enforce a contractual term where:
- The contract expressly provides that the third party may enforce it
- The term purports to confer a benefit on the third party- unless parties' common intention (based on the contract)- was that the term should not be enforceable.
Such a third party must be expressly identified by name, class, or description, but need not be in existence when the contract is made.
A third party enforcing a contractual term is bound by any arbitration agreement in the contract.
This Bill would not apply in limited situations such as instruments under the Bills of Exchange Act 1949, contracts binding on a company and its members under the Companies Act 2016, limited liability partnerships, employment contracts (to the extent of imposing obligations on employees), contracts for the international carriage of goods by sea, rail, road or air subject to applicable international conventions although exclusion or limitation clauses may be relied upon.
Conclusion
Equally noteworthy are proposed reforms that did not make the cut. The Committee declined to introduce a general statutory duty of good faith or codify doctrines of hardship and force majeure. Instead, it opted for a more conservative course, preserving contractual certainty, party autonomy and Malaysia's common law foundations. Similarly, the law on misrepresentation remains largely untouched, whilst the fraud provisions have merely been streamlined and clarified to improve accessibility and coherence.
The Final Report marks a pivotal moment in the development of Malaysian contract law. Balancing continuity with innovation, the proposed reforms aim to enhance legal certainty, commercial flexibility and fairness while ensuring that the law remains relevant in an increasingly digital and globally connected economy. Whether all, some or none of the recommendations are ultimately enacted, the Report offers a clear indication of the policy direction of travel and is likely to shape future debates on commercial contracting in Malaysia for years to come.
* * * * *
Raymond Tan, Partner, has contributed to this legal update.
© 2026 Wong & Partners. All rights reserved. Wong & Partners, member of Baker & McKenzie International. This may qualify as "Attorney Advertising" requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.