Foo Swee Chin Low Hock Heng

Foo Swee Chin Low Hock Heng

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the settlement agreement dated 11 July 2013 was initiated by the Defendant's solicitors, voluntarily executed, acted upon by payments, and there was no credible evidence of coercion or that the transaction constituted illegal moneylending; therefore the Sessions Court's factual findings were not plainly wrong and its judgment for the Plaintiff based on the settlement agreement was upheld.

Citation
WA-12BNCC-15-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Foo Swee Chin; Respondent/plaintiff: Low Hock Heng
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 January 2020
Case Number
WA-12BNCC-15-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court (appeal Hearing and Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Undue Influence/coercion, Illegality Under Moneylenders Act, Appellate Standard of Review, Discrepancy in Pleaded Amounts
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Moneylending Regulation Property Law Evidence Law Settlement Agreement Enforcement Undue Influence/coercion Illegality Under Moneylenders Act +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Foo Swee Chin

Appellant/defendant

Low Hock Heng

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court (appeal Hearing and Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement was validly and voluntarily executed
  2. 2 Whether the Sessions Court erred in accepting RM640,000 as the loan/settlement sum given alleged discrepancies
  3. 3 Whether the claim was brought against the proper party (loan given to husband)

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the settlement agreement dated 11 July 2013 was initiated by the Defendant's solicitors, voluntarily executed, acted upon by payments, and there was no credible evidence of coercion or that the transaction constituted illegal moneylending; therefore the Sessions Court's factual findings were not plainly wrong and its judgment for the Plaintiff based on the settlement agreement was upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs of RM5,000.00 to Respondent/Plaintiff (subject to 4% allocator)