Author: editor

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Terence Chan Kah Meng (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the defendant.

HIGH COURT

Striking Out Application – Order 18 r.19 of the Rules of Court 2012 – Definition of Accord and Satisfaction

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Alvin Oh Seong Yew, Foo Siew Yin & Goh Gin Jhen with him) (M/s Sia Siew Mun & Co) for the respondents.

FEDERAL COURT (PUTRAJAYA)

PARTNERSHIP: Winding-up – Setting aside – Requirement of having more than five members at time of presentation of petition – Whether Bankrupt partner considered member in partnership – Whether remaining partners in partnership had locus standi and cause of action – Whether Winding-up order valid and proper – Companies Act 1965, ss. 314 & 315 – Partnership Act 1961, ss. 41 & 47 – Partner in partnership entered assignment Agreement with assignee – Whether assignee deemed as partner for purpose of ascertaining number of partners during presentation of petition – Companies Act 1965, s. 314(2)

COMPANY LAW: Winding-up – Unregistered Companies – Partnership with more than five members – Whether unregistered Company – Whether creditor’s petition or partner’s petition – Whether partnership could be wound-up – Companies Act 1965, ss. 314 & 315 – Partnership Act 1961, ss. 41 & 47

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Tan Keng Teck (Foo Siew Yin with him) for the defendant.

HIGH COURT

Whether the Agency Agreement can be terminated as provided in clause 12.2 by giving 14 working days’ written notice and without having to assign any reason therefore – Section 158 & 159 of the Contracts Act – Section 74 of the Contracts Act- Whether Plaintiff is entitled to damages for loss of reputation as a result of a breach of the Agency Agreement – Whether Plaintiff is entitled to aggravated damages – Whether Plaintiff is entitled to exemplary damage

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Chai Jia Hui & Janet Tang Yii Chi with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the 1st & 2nd defendants.

HIGH COURT

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Committal proceedings – Allegation that deponent gave false evidence in affidavits – Whether deponent committed act or omission which interfered with due administration of justice – Whether statements and verifying affidavits disclosed prima facie contempt of court that affidavits were false – Whether court should exercise its discretion to grant leave for contempt of court proceedings regarding false affidavits filed in interlocutory applications – Rules of Court, O. 52 r. 3(1)

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Goh Gin Jhen (Tobias Lim with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the defendant.

HIGH COURT

Appeal – Law on Interference of Appellate Court – Law on Professional Negligence – Issue of retainer or the duty to honour undertakings – Duty of care for an undertaking – Turquand rule – Principle of adverse inference under section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 – Burden and onus of proof

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong & Co for the 1st defendant.

HIGH COURT

Interim Mareva Injunction pending the disposal of the Plaintiff’s suit against the Defendants: Requirements or test to be applied in considering an application for Mareva Injunction – Requirement of a good arguable case – Test of good arguable case – Liability of a Partner – Partnership Act 1961

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Tan Keng Teck & Chai Jai Hui with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the 1st & 2nd defendants.

HIGH COURT

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment – Re-amendment – Leave to amend amended defence and counterclaim – Whether application was made bona fide – Whether exercise of judicial discretion is dependent on particular evidence adduced in court – Whether consequence of amendment application would delay trial

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Parties – Joinder – Application to join a party by defendant – Whether non-joinder of parties would cause prejudice to defendant – Whether counterclaim could be defeated by non-joinder of party

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Fiona Bodipalar with him) (M/s Bodipalar Ponnudurai De Silva) for the Plaintiff.

HIGH COURT

Appeal – Whether Plaintiff’s action is barred by limitation – S.6 & 22 of the Limitation Act 1953 – Striking Out under O.18 r.19(1)(a)(b)(d) of the Rules of Court 2012 – Inherent Jurisdiction of the Court – Whether there are pleadings alleged to justify the Plaintiff’s claim against the 2nd Defendant as constructive trustee or for lifting the corporate veil – Whether there are facts alleged to justify the Plaintiff’s claim against the 2nd Defendant as constructive trustee or for lifting the corporate veil

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Lui Kar Yee & Shim Mong Seng with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the 1^st, 2^nd, 8^th to 12^th and 16^th defendants.

HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR

Civil Procedure- Judgements and orders- Setting aside- Setting aside earlier judgement or order in fresh suit- Fraud or collusion- Whether judgement or order obtained by fraud or collusion could be invalidated- Evidence Act 1950, s.44. Striking out action- Double derivative action- Existence of several cause of action- Non-disclosure of any reasonable cause of action after plaintiff filed application for discovery and interrogatories- whether claim can be struck out- Examination on restitutionary remedy at interlocutory stage- Allegation of illegality- Whether trial needed to determine availability of restitutionary remedy- Company law- Derivative action- Fraud on minority- Multiple derivative actions- Commencement of common law derivative action in Malaysia against company incorporated in England-Whether permission of English High Court required before filing suit in Malaysia- Evidence Act 1950, s.57 (1),(b)- Judicial notice- Foreign law- Opinions on English Law.