Ong Siang Pheng 1. Millennium Mall Sdn Bhd 2. Millennium Land Sdn Bhd 3. Millennium Acres Sdn Bhd

Ong Siang Pheng 1. Millennium Mall Sdn Bhd 2. Millennium Land Sdn Bhd 3. Millennium Acres Sdn Bhd

The application was dismissed because the proposed questions were not suitable for final disposal under O.14A nor for a preliminary trial under O.33 r.2: the material facts were disputed or interwoven with legal issues (notably extensive lease rental claims and corporate veil issues), the determination would not substantially dispose of the action or save time and costs, and a preliminary determination would likely cause delay and prejudice (including appeals and stays).

Citation
BA-22NCVC-94-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (representative): Ong Siang Pheng; 1st Defendant: Millennium Mall Sdn. Bhd.; 2nd Defendant: Millennium Land Sdn. Bhd.; 3rd Defendant: Millennium Acres Sdn. Bhd.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 May 2021
Case Number
BA-22NCVC-94-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Representative Action (property/contract) / Interlocutory Application Under O.14 a And/or O.33 R.2 Dismissed (pre Trial/case Management)
Outcome
1st Defendant's application under O.14A and/or O.33 r.2 dismissed
Legal Topics
Order 14 a Disposal on Question of Law, Order 33 Preliminary Question Trial, Void Ab Initio of Agreements, Property Management Agreement Validity, Strata Management Act Compliance, Refund/quantum of Entitlement, Lifting of Corporate Veil
Source Language
Malay/English

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ong Siang Pheng

Plaintiff (representative)

Millennium Mall Sdn. Bhd.

1st Defendant

Millennium Land Sdn. Bhd.

2nd Defendant

Millennium Acres Sdn. Bhd.

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Representative Action (property/contract) / Interlocutory Application Under O.14 a And/or O.33 R.2 Dismissed (pre Trial/case Management)

  1. 1 Whether the Property Management Agreement (PMA) is void ab initio and unenforceable under Contract Act 1950, Strata Titles Act 1985 and Strata Management Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether, if PMA is void ab initio, the 1st Defendant is entitled to refund of RM7,153,696.17
  3. 3 Whether the proposed questions are suitable for determination under O.14A without full trial

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the proposed questions were not suitable for final disposal under O.14A nor for a preliminary trial under O.33 r.2: the material facts were disputed or interwoven with legal issues (notably extensive lease rental claims and corporate veil issues), the determination would not substantially dispose of the action or save time and costs, and a preliminary determination would likely cause delay and prejudice (including appeals and stays).

Court Disposition

1st Defendant's application under O.14A and/or O.33 r.2 dismissed

Orders

  • Enclosure 119 dismissed
  • Costs of the application assessed at RM5000.00 subject to allocator