Tan Sri Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar Bin Abdullah Azmi Bin Tahir

Tan Sri Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar Bin Abdullah Azmi Bin Tahir

The Court of Appeal held the High Court misdirected itself in striking out the third‑party proceedings. Given the pleaded factual matrix, the nature of the allegations and the interlocutory history (including document disputes), the third‑party claims against the former CFO and co‑directors were not properly summarily disposed of for delay or for failing to disclose a triable case; the matters of joint tortfeasance, indemnity and contribution require trial and may be remedied by amendment; consequently the High Court decision of 6 September 2024 was set aside and the applications to strike out dismissed.

Citation
W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1573-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / 2nd Defendant: Tan Sri Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar bin Abdullah; Respondent / Third Party No.1: Datuk Kamal bin Mohd Ali; Respondent / Third Party No.2: Dato' Seri Norazman bin Ayob; Respondent / Third Party No.3: Azmi bin Tahir; Plaintiff: 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB); 1st Defendant: Arul Kanda a/l Kandasamy
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 November 2024
Case Number
W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1573-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Decision on Third‑party Proceedings / Appeal Judgment (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeals allowed; High Court decision dated 6 September 2024 set aside in respect of Enclosures 236 and 241; applications to strike out third‑party proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Third‑party Proceedings, Indemnity and Contribution, Fiduciary Duty, Strike Out for Delay, Pleading Sufficiency
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Corporate Governance Third‑party Proceedings Indemnity and Contribution Fiduciary Duty Strike Out for Delay +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Sri Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar bin Abdullah

Appellant / 2nd Defendant

Datuk Kamal bin Mohd Ali

Respondent / Third Party No.1

Dato' Seri Norazman bin Ayob

Respondent / Third Party No.2

Azmi bin Tahir

Respondent / Third Party No.3

1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB)

Plaintiff

Arul Kanda a/l Kandasamy

1st Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Decision on Third‑party Proceedings / Appeal Judgment (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court correctly struck out third‑party claims against former directors and CFO
  2. 2 Whether there was an inordinate delay or abuse of process in instituting third‑party proceedings
  3. 3 Whether a director may be sued by a co‑director for contribution/indemnity and whether such claims require the company to be the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held the High Court misdirected itself in striking out the third‑party proceedings. Given the pleaded factual matrix, the nature of the allegations and the interlocutory history (including document disputes), the third‑party claims against the former CFO and co‑directors were not properly summarily disposed of for delay or for failing to disclose a triable case; the matters of joint tortfeasance, indemnity and contribution require trial and may be remedied by amendment; consequently the High Court decision of 6 September 2024 was set aside and the applications to strike out dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; High Court decision dated 6 September 2024 set aside in respect of Enclosures 236 and 241; applications to strike out third‑party proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • High Court decision dated 6 September 2024 in respect of High Court Enclosures 236 and 241 set aside
  • Application by Datuk Kamal and Dato' Seri Norazman (Enclosure 236) dismissed