Category: Malayan Law Journal

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Lim Kian Leong & Co)

High Court

Issue : appeal against decision of SAR to allow amendments to name of 3rd Defendant to name of partners and to amend SOC and writ

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong, SS Tan (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the Plaintiff

High Court

Issue : Request for assistance under O 39

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Tan Shin Shin with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the plaintiffs

High Court (Melaka)

Issue : Interlocutory injunction and striking out

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kim Leong, Wong Yoke Peng, Tan Shin Shin, Rohana bte Ngah (Lim Kian Leong & Co), for the Appellants

Federal Court

Issue : Two appeals arising from an application by the Respondent for the learned High Court Judge to recuse herself from hearing Civil Suit No. D2-22-1179-2002. Her Ladyship dismissed the application but her order was reversed by the Court of Appeal

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong, Wong Yoke Peng, Tan Shin Shin and Rohana bte Ngah with him) (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the appellants

Federal Court

Civil Procedure – Appeal – Issue not raised in High Court – New case and new test introduced at Federal Court which was not argued in court below – Whether appellants were only citing new authority which they had failed to cite in the earlier proceedings – Whether Federal Court should determine the right test to be applied

Civil Procedure – Appeal – New point raised on appeal – New case and new test introduced at Federal Court which was not argued in court below – Whether appellants were only citing new authority which they had failed to cite in the earlier proceedings – Whether Federal Court should determine the right test to be applied

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Tan Keng Teck, Rohana bte Ngah (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the Plaintiff

High Court

Issue : an appeal by the defendants in enclosure 14 against the decision of the learned Senior Assistant Registrar allowing the plaintiff’s application to enter a summary judgment against the defendants

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong, Wong Yoke Peng, Tan Shin Shin, Rohana bte Ngah (Lim Kian Leong & Co)

Federal Court

Civil Procedure – Appeal – Issue not raised in High Court – New case and new test introduced at Federal Court which was not argued in court below – Whether appellants were only citing new authority which they had failed to cite in the earlier proceedings – Whether Federal Court should determine the right test to be applied

Civil Procedure – Appeal – New point raised on appeal – New case and new test introduced at Federal Court which was not argued in court below – Whether appellants were only citing new authority which they had failed to cite in the earlier proceedings – Whether Federal Court should determine the right test to be applied

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong assisted by Tan Shin Shin (Lim Kian Leong & Co)

High Court

Companies and Corporations – Winding up – Application to strike out winding up petition – Whether multiplicity of proceedings – Refiling of petition – Second petition presented by the same petitioners against the same respondents based on substantially the same grounds

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the respondents

High Court

Civil Procedure – Pleadings – Amendment of – Amendment of winding-up petition – Whether court may give leave to amend petition under O 20 r 5 read in conjunction with O 20 r 7 of Rules of the High Court 1980

Companies and Corporations – Winding up – Petition – Amendment – Whether any injustice to other side – Whether amendments bona fide – Whether prejudice to other side can be compensated by costs – Whether amendments would turn suit of one character into suit of another and inconsistent character – Companies Act 1965 s 221(2)(e)

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
Lim Kian Leong (Lim Kian Leong & Co) for the respondents

High Court

Companies and Corporations – Winding up – Petition – Respondents filed application to restrain law firm from acting for petitioners – Whether law firm possessed any information, confidential or otherwise that could be used against respondents – Whether there was conflict of interest – Whether court could grant injunctive relief – Companies Act 1965 ss 218, 221(2)(f)