PEMPETISYEN Norliah Binti A P Kunhibava 1. ) Mohd Noor Amin Bin Mohd Noor Khan 2. ) SHARIZA BINTI KAMARUZZAMAN 3. ) NUR JASNI BIN MOHAMED 4. ) NUEMERA (M) SDN BHD

PEMPETISYEN Norliah Binti A P Kunhibava 1. ) Mohd Noor Amin Bin Mohd Noor Khan 2. ) SHARIZA BINTI KAMARUZZAMAN 3. ) NUR JASNI BIN MOHAMED 4. ) NUEMERA (M) SDN BHD

The recusal application failed because an objective fair-minded informed observer would not conclude there was a real possibility of bias: the sequencing decisions were bona fide case management choices grounded in precedent, any shifts showed an open mind responsive to argument, the recusal bid was a collateral abuse aimed at delaying urgent interlocutory relief (Encl 9), and the Malaysian Bar's participation as amicus was within its remit; accordingly the recusal was dismissed and treated as an abuse with indemnity costs against the 1st–3rd respondents.

Citation
WA-28NCC-114-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: Norliah binti A P Kunhibava; 1st Respondent: Mohd Noor Amin bin Mohd Noor Khan; 2nd Respondent: Shariza binti Kamaruzzaman; 3rd Respondent: Nur Jasni bin Mohamed; 4th Respondent / Company: Nuemera (M) Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 January 2026
Case Number
WA-28NCC-114-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) Petition Under Companies Act 2016 / Interlocutory Stage — Recusal Application and Interlocutory Hearings Concerning Appointment of Interim Liquidators and Sequencing of Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Recusal application (Encl 157) dismissed; application treated as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Winding Up, Interim Liquidators, Recusal and Apparent Bias, Case Management and Sequencing, Abuse of Process, Amicus Curiae
Source Language
Malay/English
Corporate Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Judicial Ethics Winding Up Interim Liquidators Recusal and Apparent Bias Case Management and Sequencing +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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norliah binti A P Kunhibava

Petitioner

Mohd Noor Amin bin Mohd Noor Khan

1st Respondent

Shariza binti Kamaruzzaman

2nd Respondent

Nur Jasni bin Mohamed

3rd Respondent

Nuemera (M) Sdn Bhd

4th Respondent / Company

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up) Petition Under Companies Act 2016 / Interlocutory Stage — Recusal Application and Interlocutory Hearings Concerning Appointment of Interim Liquidators and Sequencing of Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Judicial Commissioner had predetermination or apparent bias warranting recusal
  2. 2 Whether sequencing decisions (hearing Encl 9 before Encl 13 and before Encl 62 & 71) were improper or legitimate case management
  3. 3 Whether the recusal application was an abuse of process and a tactic to delay interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

The recusal application failed because an objective fair-minded informed observer would not conclude there was a real possibility of bias: the sequencing decisions were bona fide case management choices grounded in precedent, any shifts showed an open mind responsive to argument, the recusal bid was a collateral abuse aimed at delaying urgent interlocutory relief (Encl 9), and the Malaysian Bar's participation as amicus was within its remit; accordingly the recusal was dismissed and treated as an abuse with indemnity costs against the 1st–3rd respondents.

Court Disposition

Recusal application (Encl 157) dismissed; application treated as abuse of process

Orders

  • Encl 157 dismissed with costs on an indemnity basis payable forthwith
  • Costs to be borne jointly and severally by the 1st to 3rd Respondents