BPD in Court

Our top notch lawyers are trail blazers in litigating complex legal issues. They have represented clients in hundreds of cases in the High Court, Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, many of which have been reported in the law journals. Here are the summaries of some of the significant and successful cases in the practice areas of our firm.
September 26, 2020

Toralf Mueller v Alcim Holding Sdn Bhd & Ors [2019] 9 MLJ 670

Brief facts of the case Toralf Mueller (TM) filed a counterclaim in a conspiracy suit and a section 181 suit against Alcim Holding and the rest of the respondents in the case. TM filed myriad of claims/ damages against Alcim Holding and the rest of the respondents in both suits. The counterclaim was allowed and Alcim holding was wound up […]
September 26, 2020

Kuan Pek Seng @ Alan Kuan v Robert Doran & Ors And Other Appeals [2013] 2 MLJ 174

Brief facts of the case Rober Doran (RD) claimed he entered into a shareholder’s agreement with Alan whereby they both enter into a joint venture to recycle plastic flakes and to produce plastic staple fibre from the plastic flakes. He injected a huge sum of money into the joint venture. However, he claims that Alan breached the agreement and the […]
September 26, 2020

Francis a/l Augustine Pereira v Dataran Mantin Sdn Bhd & Ors and other appeals [2014] 6 MLJ 56

Brief facts of the case Dataran Mantin (DM), a property development company, was involved in building a condominium. However, the project was never completed (it was abandoned). To top it off, DM could not repay the monies that was due to OCBC Bank and other unsecured creditors. A winding up petition was presented against the DM. Whilst that was happening, […]
September 26, 2020

Sinarlim Sdn Bhd v Medallion Builders Sdn Bhd (previously known as RC-Soils (M) Sdn Bhd and other suits [2015] 4 MLJcon247

Brief facts of the case Sinarlim entered into 3 separate contracts with Medallion Builders. Medallion Builders owes Sinarlim monies from all three contracts. Hence the current suit. Sinarlim produced myriad of evidence to back up its claim. On the other hand, Medallion Builders submitted a no claim to answer (as there were no written contract between them). The High Court […]
September 26, 2020

Kuan Shhin @ Kuan Nyong Hin v Chin Foh Trading Sdn Bhd & Anor [2015] 3 MLJ 856

In order for fresh evidence to be accepted at the appeal stage under Rules 7 (3) and (3A) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994, the party who wishes to produce the evidence must show that there are special grounds to do so. This condition can be fulfilled if the party fulfills three criterias that was laid down […]
September 26, 2020

Beta Tegap Sdn Bhd v Majlis Perbandaran Sepang (Attorney General of Malaysia, The Intervener) [2013] 10 MLJ 240

Section 6 of the Limitation Acts states that no legal action founded on a contract or tort can be brought against another individual/ company after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action occurred. However, a cause of action for specific performance of a contract which involves or encompasses the recovery of trust property […]
September 26, 2020

ECM Libra Investment Bank Bhd v Foo Ai Meng & Ors [2013] 3 MLJ 35

Brief facts of the case A dispute arose between ECM and Alliance Investment Back (AIB) . During trial, ECM issued a subpoena against one of the witnesses in court, requiring him to produce certain documents. This was so ECM could prove that he had suffered loss as a result of the dispute (more specifically, loss of future earnings). The witness […]
September 26, 2020

Harianto Effendy Bin Zakaria & Ors v Mahkamah Perusahaan Malaysia & Anor [2014] 6 MLJ 305

Brief facts of the case Harianto and the rest of the appellant in this case were the employees of CIMB Bank. They were also members of the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE). Following a trade dispute between NUBE and CIMB, they decided to participate in an unlawful picket in the lobby and the banking hall of CIMB headquarters. In […]
September 26, 2020

Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-Pekerja Bank & Ors v The New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd & Ors and Another Suit [2013] 8 MLJ 199

Brief facts of the case Kesatuaan Kebangsaan Pekerja Bank & Ors, or the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) and the National Executive Council members of NUBE brought a libel suit against NST, its writers and one of its witnesses for publishing four defamatory articles against NUBE and its Executive Council members. The contents of the four articles were in […]
September 26, 2020

National Union of Bank Employees v Director of General of Trade Unions & Anor [2015] 1 MLJ 881

The power of the Director of General of Trade Union The Director of General of Trade Union must adhere to section 12 (2) and (3) of the Trade Union Act 1959 strictly before he can register a trade union under section 12 (1) of the Act.Where applicable, he is required to notified all necessary and interested parties to obtain their […]
September 26, 2020

National Union of Bank Employees v Noorzeela Bt Lamin And Another Suit [2014] 7 MLJ 31

As with the case of Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-Pekerja Bank & Ors v The New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd & Ors and Another Suit [2013] 8 MLJ 199, the High Court ruled in favour of NUBE for yet another libel suit. This time, the parties who are being sued for libel are Noorzeela Bt Lamin and Zayuddin bin Mohamed Yusop, […]
September 26, 2020

National Union of Bank Employees v Noorzeela Bt Lamin [2012] 9 MLJ 410

As with the case of National Union of Bank Employees v Noorzeela Bt Lamin And Another Suit [2014] 7 MLJ 31, the High Court ruled in favour of NUBE (this occurred when Noorzeela Bt Lamin and Zayuddin bin Mohamed Yusop were still members of NUBE). In this case, both Noorzeela and Zayuddin claimed that section 22 (1) of the Trade […]
September 26, 2020

Sumatec Engineering and Construction Sdn Bhd v Malaysia Refining Co Sdn Bhd [2012] 4 MLJ 1

Overview Unconscionability is an additional exception (apart from fraud) that entitles a the court to restrain a party from calling on or demanding and receiving monies under a bank guarantee or performance bond. Brief facts of the case Sumatec was appointed by Malaysia Refining to be its contractor for a project. Sumatec was required to provide a bank guarantee, or […]
September 26, 2020

Damansara Realty Bhd v Bungsar Hill Holdings Sdn Bhd & Anor [2011] 6 MLJ 464

Brief facts of the case Damansara Realty entered into a property development agreement (PDA) with the rest of the respondents in this case. Under the agreement, Damansara Realty was given development rights to the land (which was owned by Bungsar Hill Holdings) for 15 years. However, nothing was done to the land for almost 14 years. Fed up with Damansara […]
September 26, 2020

Terengganu Forest Products Sdn Bhd v Cosco Container Lines Co Ltd & Anor and Other Applications [2011] 1 MLJ 25

A special panel of five judges was set up to determine once and for all the interpretation of the provision of section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 in relation to an application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court. Ultimately, the Federal Court held that in order for a party to apply for a leave to […]
September 26, 2020

Phileo Allied Securities Sdn Bhd v Yong Keong Sheng & Anor [2011] 8 MLJ 834

The High Court (amongst others) held that: Whoever desires the court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability, dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. If he could not, then his claim must fail; Failure to call a material witness to testify/ subpoena the witness, when the party knows […]
September 26, 2020

Perwaja Steel S/B v. RHB Bank Bhd and 789 others [2019] 5 AMR 342

We acted for the employees in the case of Perwaja Steel v RHB Bank. This decision provides guidance as to how a secured creditor is to deal with wages and statutory payments due to employees under section 31 of the Employment Act 1955 (“EA”) when it disposes of a security held over property which is a place of employment. Brief […]
July 8, 2019

Caveat venditor – has the pendulum swung too far?

Overview ‘Caveat emptor’ or ‘buyer beware’ is a familiar concept. It is an age-old warning to all prospective buyers that goods are bought at their own risk. The effects and consequences of the principle of caveat emptor have been criticised over time and as a result, commercial law has slowly developed more stringent protection for consumers and buyers. This has […]
April 22, 2019

Directors duty to act in company’s best interests:how much is too much?

Introduction It is well known that directors have a duty to act in good faith and in a company’s best interests. Thisduty takes centre stage, especially in times when a company’s survival is threatened. However, to what extent are directors expected to exercise such duties? When a company is in distress, are directors entitled to exploit and abuse statutory restructuring […]
April 4, 2019

Kementerian Pertahanan Malaysia & Anor v Malaysian International Shipping Corp Bhd & Ors [2007] 5 MLJ 393

The Court of Appeal held that a private law firm appointed by the insurers were entitled to institute proceedings in the name of the Government of Malaysia and/or the Ministry of Defence, without need for authorization from the Attorney General under s 24(3) of the Government Proceedings Act 1953. The Court of Appeal found that the insurers had dominus litus […]
April 4, 2019

Papparoti (M) Sdn Bhd v Roti-Roti International Sdn Bhd & Ors [2009] 1 LNS 683 (affirmed by Court of Appeal)

The High Court set aside an interlocutory injunction to restrain the infringement and/or the passing off of a Malaysian trade mark in South Korea by recognising the territorial limits of trademark protection in Malaysia. The High Court also ruled that the trademark protection for bakery products cannot be extended to include raw materials (such as dough and toppings) used to […]
April 4, 2019

Hanifah Teo & Associates v BDO Binder & Ors & Another Appeal [2013] 1 LNS 1512 (affirmed by Federal Court)

The Court of Appeal ruled that it is not a pre-requisite for a “partner” of an accounting firm to hold an audit licence, and that accounting firm partnerships can include partners who carry out non-audit related work, which does not require such licence. Alvin Tang acted for the third party, partners of the accounting firm.
April 4, 2019

Silver Bird Group Bhd & Ors v Dato’ Tan Han Kook & Ors [2016] 9 MLJ 503 (affirmed by both Court of Appeal and Federal Court)

The High Court allowed the Plaintiff to recall an auditor witness for cross-examination, even after the conclusion of the defendants’ case, to introduce evidence of disciplinary findings by the Audit Oversight Board against the witness, in respect of issues to be determined at trial. Alvin Tang acted for the Plaintiff (Silver Bird Group Bhd).
February 18, 2019

Exclusion clauses – abuse of freedom of contract?

Overview It is common for large conglomerates and financial institutions to require customers to execute agreements with standard boilerplate terms and conditions. Commercial reality dictates that these standard terms and conditions are usually largely one-sided, favouring the corporations by virtue of the unequal bargaining power between the parties. The fine print of these boilerplate terms and conditions typically contains an […]
January 3, 2019

Tebing Aur Sdn Bhd v WWE Holdings Bhd [2012] 1 LNS 744

The High Court allowed the Plaintiff’s claim for total value of works executed at the construction site based on a written agreement executed between parties. Shamalah Selvarajah acted for the Plaintiff, Tebing Aur Sdn Bhd
January 2, 2019

Dato Muhammad Hafidz Nuruddin v Ramlan Juki & Anor [2015] 1 LNS 492

The Plaintiff brought a libel action against the Defendants. The High Court held that although the statement was found to be defamatory against the Plaintiff, the Defendants were protected by defence of qualified privilege as there was a common and corresponding interest between the Defendants and to whom the statement was made. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim was dismissed with costs. […]
January 1, 2019

Per: Helen Seah; Ex-Parte: Ambank(M) Berhad [2011] 1 LNS 175

The High Court held that failure to prove authorisation to attest the Creditors Petition renders the Creditors Petition defective. Accordingly, the High Court set aside the Creditors Petition, Adjudication Order and Receiving Order. Shamalah Selvarajah acted for the Judgment Debtor, Helen Seah.
December 2, 2018

Shencourt Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) (in receivership) v Shencourt Properties Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) [2019] MLJU 31

The Court of Appeal removed both of the joint liquidators of Shencourt Properties from office since the liquidation of the company had been rendered dysfunctional due to the joint liquidators’ inability and/or unwillingness to work together for the benefit of the company.  2 Alvin Tang acted for Shencourt Sdn Bhd, the applicant contributory.
November 12, 2018

Wrongdoer control: no longer just a numbers game

Overview It has long been recognised that where wrongdoers control a company and thus prevent it from bringing an action, the courts will allow shareholders to do so on the company’s behalf in order to obtain redress by way of a derivative action. While the courts have recognised a range of scenarios where wrongdoers can be said to control the […]
September 20, 2018

Kamuja Hartamas Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Aras Suasana Sdn Bhd) vs Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia Bhd [2017] 3 MLJ 668.

Unlawful Termination of Financing for Development Project The Court of Appeal decided that the bridging loan facility awarded by Bank Kerjasama to the developer of the project, Kamuja Hartamas (KH) had been wrongfully terminated and therefore KH was entitled to damages for the wrongful termination. (Fiona acted for KH)
September 20, 2018

Dato’ Low Mung Hua (in his personal capacity and as representative of the members of the Eng Bee family) v Banting Hock Hin Estate Co Sdn Bhd & 8 Ors [2003] 6 AMR 245.

Minority Shareholder Fails in Bid to Prove Oppression by Majority Shareholders The High Court dismissed the interim injunction and petition by Dato’ Low Mung Hua that the Board of Directors of Banting Hock Hin Estate acted oppressively in passing certain resolutions and disregarded his legitimate expectations for management control of the company. (Alvin acted for the 2nd, 3rd, 8th and […]
September 20, 2018

Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Bukan Eksekutif Maybank Bhd v Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-Pekerja Bank & Anor [2018] 2 MLJ 590

Federal Court Upholds Trade Union’s Right to Be Heard The Federal Court held that the Director General of Trade Unions had a duty to consult with all relevant parties before making a decision whether to register a trade union under s 12 of the Trade Unions Act 1959.
September 20, 2018

Nur Rasidah bt Jamaludin v Malayan Banking Bhd and other appeals [2018] 3 MLJ 127 Court of Appeal

Members/Officers of Trade Unions Have Immunity from Libel The Facts Five officers/members of the National Union of Bank Employees (‘NUBE’) were separately sued by Malayan Banking Bhd (‘MBB’) in the High Court for publicly making disparaging statements about the bank in connection with an alleged unfair labour practice that had become the subject of an on-going trade dispute between and […]
September 20, 2018

Sazean Engineering & Construction Sdn Bhd v Bumi Bersatu Resources Sdn Bhd – [2018] MLJU 839

Court of Appeal Rules on Effect of a Bankrupt Director in a 2 Director Company under the Companies Act, 1965
September 20, 2018

Lim Nyuk Foh v Datuk Zainal Abidin bin Haji Ahmad & Anor [2018] MLJU 800

A Verbal Contract is as Legally Binding as a Written One A contract can be created based on an oral representations  and the court will take into consideration the events and background leading to the formation of the contract. Further, the Court  would look into the intention of the parties in deducing whether there was an intention to create legal […]
September 20, 2018

Stamford Holdings Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Negeri Johor & Ors [1998] 1 MLJ 607.

State Government’s Acquisition of Land Revoked For Bad Faith The Court of Appeal found that compulsory acquisition of land could be challenged on bad faith and accordingly allowed the appeal by Stamford Holdings against the acquisition of its land by Kerajaan Negeri Johor. (Fiona acted for Stamford Holdings)
September 20, 2018

Nik Mohd Zain bin Haji Omar v Hwang-DBS Securities Sdn Bhd [2010] MLJ 234.

Investor Liable for Losses Incurred from Traded Shares The High Court held that an investor who had denied authorising the Remisier to buy shares was liable for the traded shares and consequently Hwang-DBS had the right to sell of the shares pledged as security to offset the losses incurred. (Fiona acted for the Remisier)
September 20, 2018

CIMB Investment Bank Bhd vs Ernst & Young & Anor Appeal [2014] 6 CLJ 438.

Auditors’ Duty of Care Extends to Company’s Investors The Court of Appeal held that auditors owe a duty of care to a licensed fund company’s investors when they perform statutory audits. The Court found the auditors to be professionally negligent in not detecting the fund company’s fraud in the management of the client’s funds. (Fiona acted for CIMB)
May 20, 2017

Projeck Lebuhraya Usahasama Bhd v. Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya [2016] 9 CLJ 238.

Local Council Has No Jurisdiction Over Federal Roads The High Court held that MPSJ did not have jurisdiction over the toll booths operated by PLUS as the toll booths were operating on land that had been declared as federal roads by the Minister of Works. (Fiona acted for PLUS)
April 20, 2017

Kumpulan Perubatan (Johor) Sdn Bhd v. Dr Mohd Adnan Sulaiman & Anor [2015] 1 CLJ 471, Court of Appeal

The Facts The first and second respondents entered into a ‘Joint Venture Agreement Incorporating Shareholders Agreement’ (‘JVSA’) with the appellant, Kumpulan Perubatan Johor Sdn Bhd (‘KPJ’), a company involved in the running of private hospitals. The JVSA was entered into as to incorporate a limited liability company (‘Hospital Penawar Sdn Bhd’) to run a private hospital, Hospital Penawar (‘HP’).
March 20, 2017

Folin & Brothers Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) & Ors v Folin Food Processing Sdn Bhd & Ors [2011] 6 MLJ 585.

Undervaluation of Property and Shares Successfully Challenged The Court of Appeal held that the consent order to obtain an independent valuation of the shares of Folin Food was not followed and therefore, a fresh valuation exercise should be commenced to determine the fair value of the shares of Folin Food.(Fiona acted for Folin Brothers and the joint liquidators)
January 21, 2017

Pioneer Haven Sdn Bhd v Ho Hup Construction Co Bhd & Anor and other appeals [2012] 3 MLJ 616

The Court of Appeal found that a Joint Development Agreement, in respect of the primary land of the company, coupled with a Power of Attorney to the developer, did not amount to a disposal of a substantial portion of the company’s property within the meaning of s 132C of the Companies Act 1965 (thereby requiring prior shareholder approval). The Court […]
January 20, 2017

Tengku Dato’ Ibrahim Petra bin Tengku Indra Petra v Petra Perdana Bhd and Wong Fook Heng and Tiong Yong Kong v Petra Perdana Bhd [2018] 2 MLJ 177

Landmark Federal Court case on Power of Directors vs Shareholders