LEOPAD HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. ASIAN SHIELD WAREHOUSING SDN. BHD.

LEOPAD HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. ASIAN SHIELD WAREHOUSING SDN. BHD.

Where a company is wound up its management vests in the liquidator; a contributory who is an undischarged bankrupt may apply to the liquidator for sanction under s.38(1)(a) to enable the wound up company to commence proceedings and that solitary act does not amount to directly or indirectly taking part in management under s.38(1)(d); prior DGI permission was therefore not required and the sanction obtained was valid; appeal dismissed.

Citation
B-02(IM)(NCVC)-1977-09/2018 & B-02(IM)(NCVC)-1978-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Leopad Holdings Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent/plaintiff: Asian Shield Warehousing Sdn. Bhd.; Contributory/undischarged Bankrupt: Devi a/p Suppiah
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 December 2019
Case Number
B-02(IM)(NCVC)-1977-09/2018 & B-02(IM)(NCVC)-1978-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Consolidated Appeals
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the learned trial judge affirmed; concurrent appeal struck off
Legal Topics
Sanction for Litigation by Contributory, S.38 Bankruptcy Act 1967, Locus Standi of Bankrupt Contributory, Res Judicata, Security for Costs, Role of Liquidator in Winding Up
Source Language
Malay/English
Bankruptcy Law Company Law Civil Procedure Insolvency Sanction for Litigation by Contributory S.38 Bankruptcy Act 1967 Locus Standi of Bankrupt Contributory Res Judicata +2 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 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leopad Holdings Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant/defendant

Asian Shield Warehousing Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent/plaintiff

Devi a/p Suppiah

Contributory/undischarged Bankrupt

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Consolidated Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an undischarged bankrupt contributory required prior sanction under s.38(1)(d) to apply for sanction for a wound up company
  2. 2 Whether applying for sanction to enable a wound up company to sue amounts to directly or indirectly taking part in management under s.38(1)(d)
  3. 3 Whether the contributory had duty to disclose her bankruptcy status and whether sanction can be retrospective

Ratio Decidendi

Where a company is wound up its management vests in the liquidator; a contributory who is an undischarged bankrupt may apply to the liquidator for sanction under s.38(1)(a) to enable the wound up company to commence proceedings and that solitary act does not amount to directly or indirectly taking part in management under s.38(1)(d); prior DGI permission was therefore not required and the sanction obtained was valid; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the learned trial judge affirmed; concurrent appeal struck off

Orders

  • Dismissed/struck off the defendant's Appeal 1978 with no order as to costs