Christopher Grant (Passport No: 465551165) 1. Teh Beng Leong (NRIC No: 700802-07-5299) 2. Pang Shiau Wooi (NRIC No: 780507-02-5398)

Christopher Grant (Passport No: 465551165) 1. Teh Beng Leong (NRIC No: 700802-07-5299) 2. Pang Shiau Wooi (NRIC No: 780507-02-5398)

The appeal was dismissed because the amended statement of claim contained sufficient averments (alter-ego control, misrepresentation, particulars of payment and disparity in work value, unjust enrichment and conduct on termination) to raise triable issues on piercing the corporate veil and the negligence claim against the director in his personal capacity was properly pleaded; striking out was inappropriate as the claim was not plainly unsustainable and the matters must be resolved at trial.

Citation
PA-12ANCC-8-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Christopher Grant; Respondent/plaintiff (lower Court): Teh Beng Leong; Respondent/plaintiff (lower Court): Pang Shiau Wooi; 1st Defendant (lower Court): GB Interior Designs & Kitchens Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Case Number
PA-12ANCC-8-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appeal Against Dismissal of Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R 19(1) Rules of Court 2012 (re Hearing on Appeal Record)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Piercing Corporate Veil, Striking Out Under Order 18 R 19(1), Wrongful Termination, Misrepresentation, Unjust Enrichment
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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Grant

Appellant

Teh Beng Leong

Respondent/plaintiff (lower Court)

Pang Shiau Wooi

Respondent/plaintiff (lower Court)

GB Interior Designs & Kitchens Sdn Bhd

1st Defendant (lower Court)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appeal Against Dismissal of Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R 19(1) Rules of Court 2012 (re Hearing on Appeal Record)

  1. 1 Whether the corporate veil can be pierced to hold the director personally liable for breach of contract and unjust enrichment
  2. 2 Whether the amended statement of claim is plainly unsustainable and should be struck out under O 18 r 19(1)
  3. 3 Whether negligence claim against a corporate entity is properly pleaded or should be against natural persons

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the amended statement of claim contained sufficient averments (alter-ego control, misrepresentation, particulars of payment and disparity in work value, unjust enrichment and conduct on termination) to raise triable issues on piercing the corporate veil and the negligence claim against the director in his personal capacity was properly pleaded; striking out was inappropriate as the claim was not plainly unsustainable and the matters must be resolved at trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to respondents