Yee Teck Fah Lee Chee Meng Loo Kim Lang

Yee Teck Fah Lee Chee Meng Loo Kim Lang

Some counterclaim allegations were of a different nature and character from mere defences (including claims about professional conduct and a RM4,000,000 monetary claim) so Lee & Loo were the real attackers in the counterclaim; having regard to all circumstances and absence of evidence they would be prejudiced, a moderate security for costs was just and proportionate; RM30,000 was assessed as reasonable and ordered to be deposited within 14 days, with assessed costs of RM4,000 to be paid by Lee & Loo.

Citation
BA-22NCvC-182-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (main Suit); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Yee Teck Fah; Defendant (main Suit); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Lee Chee Meng; Defendant (main Suit); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Loo Kim Lang; Defendant (counterclaim): Ong Gek Lin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 November 2021
Case Number
BA-22NCvC-182-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Specific Performance Claim With Counterclaim / Application for Security for Costs in Counterclaim; Judgment/sealed Order (29 Nov 2021; Sealed 10 Jan 2022)
Outcome
Application allowed in part: security for costs ordered and costs awarded to applicant; no stay of proceedings.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Counterclaim, Specific Performance, Fiduciary Duty, Costs Assessment, Bankruptcy Effect on Civil Litigation
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Equity and Trusts Insolvency/bankruptcy Professional Negligence Security for Costs Counterclaim Specific Performance +3 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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yee Teck Fah

Plaintiff (main Suit); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Lee Chee Meng

Defendant (main Suit); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Loo Kim Lang

Defendant (main Suit); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Ong Gek Lin

Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Specific Performance Claim With Counterclaim / Application for Security for Costs in Counterclaim; Judgment/sealed Order (29 Nov 2021; Sealed 10 Jan 2022)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against bankrupt/impecunious counterclaimants
  2. 2 Whether the counterclaimants are the real 'attackers' such that security for costs is appropriate
  3. 3 Whether the counterclaims are of different nature and character from mere defences

Ratio Decidendi

Some counterclaim allegations were of a different nature and character from mere defences (including claims about professional conduct and a RM4,000,000 monetary claim) so Lee & Loo were the real attackers in the counterclaim; having regard to all circumstances and absence of evidence they would be prejudiced, a moderate security for costs was just and proportionate; RM30,000 was assessed as reasonable and ordered to be deposited within 14 days, with assessed costs of RM4,000 to be paid by Lee & Loo.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part: security for costs ordered and costs awarded to applicant; no stay of proceedings.

Orders

  • Lee Chee Meng and Loo Kim Lang to deposit security for costs of RM30,000 in joint names of the plaintiff's solicitor and the defendants' solicitor as joint stakeholders within 14 days from service of the sealed order
  • Costs of the application assessed at RM4,000 to be paid by Lee Chee Meng and Loo Kim Lang to Yee Teck Fah (subject to allocator)