LIN FUR YANG LIN FUA LIAN

LIN FUR YANG LIN FUA LIAN

The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court order dated 19 February 2020 and held that the Court of Appeal's earlier order did not implicitly impugn the 2013 transfer. Because the 2013 transfer and the 2003 sale involved a third party (Mdm Wong) who was not before the court, declarations affecting her rights could not be granted; accordingly Lot 8650 was not enforceable under the Consent Order and enforcement excluding Lot 8650 was ordered.

Citation
J-02(IM)-607-04/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant in Original Suit: Lin Fur Yang; Respondent / Plaintiff in Original Suit: Lin Fua Lian
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 March 2021
Case Number
J-02(IM)-607-04/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court Enforcement Applications Under Order 45 R.8 Rules of Court 2012 / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeals From High Court Order Dated 19 February 2020
Outcome
Appeals allowed; High Court Order dated 19 February 2020 set aside.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Consent Order, Execution Against Land, Validity of Transfer and Power of Attorney, Declaratory Relief Affecting Non Parties, Necessary Parties to Proceedings
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Property/land Law Family/inheritance Law Enforcement of Consent Order Execution Against Land Validity of Transfer and Power of Attorney Declaratory Relief Affecting Non Parties Necessary Parties to Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lin Fur Yang

Appellant / Defendant in Original Suit

Lin Fua Lian

Respondent / Plaintiff in Original Suit

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court Enforcement Applications Under Order 45 R.8 Rules of Court 2012 / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeals From High Court Order Dated 19 February 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Lot 8650 was part of the Consent Order and therefore subject to execution
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal's order of 27 April 2017 implicitly declared the 2013 transfer null and void
  3. 3 Whether declaratory relief affecting the rights of a third party (Mdm Wong) can be granted when that party was not before the court

Ratio Decidendi

The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court order dated 19 February 2020 and held that the Court of Appeal's earlier order did not implicitly impugn the 2013 transfer. Because the 2013 transfer and the 2003 sale involved a third party (Mdm Wong) who was not before the court, declarations affecting her rights could not be granted; accordingly Lot 8650 was not enforceable under the Consent Order and enforcement excluding Lot 8650 was ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; High Court Order dated 19 February 2020 set aside.

Orders

  • Enclosure 34 dismissed
  • Enclosure 31 allowed