PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Malayan Banking Berhad PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Liew Suat Ngoh PIHAK TERKILAN KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN INSOLVENSI MALAYSIA

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Malayan Banking Berhad PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Liew Suat Ngoh PIHAK TERKILAN KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN INSOLVENSI MALAYSIA

Discharge was dismissed because the DGI report was incomplete and did not adequately investigate the bankrupt's assets and affairs, the bankrupt filed her Statement of Affairs late amounting to an offence/contempt under the Act, and the declared dividend (1%) was manifestly inadequate; on these grounds and to protect creditors and public commercial morality the court refused discharge.

Citation
WA-29PB-757-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Malayan Banking Berhad; Judgment Debtor: Liew Suat Ngoh
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 March 2023
Case Number
WA-29PB-757-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Discharge Application Under Insolvency Act 1967 (post Bankruptcy) / Decision on Summons in Chambers (discharge Application)
Outcome
Discharge application dismissed
Legal Topics
Discharge From Bankruptcy, Director General of Insolvency Report, Statement of Affairs Filing Obligations, Contempt/offence Under Insolvency Act, Dividend Requirement for Discharge
Source Language
Malay/English
Insolvency/bankruptcy Civil Procedure Commercial Law Discharge From Bankruptcy Director General of Insolvency Report Statement of Affairs Filing Obligations Contempt/offence Under Insolvency Act Dividend Requirement for Discharge

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malayan Banking Berhad

Judgment Creditor

Liew Suat Ngoh

Judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Discharge Application Under Insolvency Act 1967 (post Bankruptcy) / Decision on Summons in Chambers (discharge Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bankrupt committed an offence by late filing of Statement of Affairs (s16) and thus falls under s33(4)
  2. 2 Whether the DGI report is incomplete and unreliable for the court to exercise discretion under s33(3)
  3. 3 Whether discharge can be granted given declared dividend (1%) is below statutory 50% threshold where s33(4) applies

Ratio Decidendi

Discharge was dismissed because the DGI report was incomplete and did not adequately investigate the bankrupt's assets and affairs, the bankrupt filed her Statement of Affairs late amounting to an offence/contempt under the Act, and the declared dividend (1%) was manifestly inadequate; on these grounds and to protect creditors and public commercial morality the court refused discharge.

Court Disposition

Discharge application dismissed

Orders

  • Discharge application dismissed
  • Costs RM 1500.00 subject to allocator fee