Yap Yeow Han and Abd Azim bin Abd Razak for the Applicant [Messrs Rahmat Lim & Partners] 1. ) Emily Wong and H’ng Yen Jun for the 1 st Respondent [Messrs Dennis Nik & Wong] 2. ) Saheran Suhendran and Rodney Gan for the 2nd Respondent [Messr
Motion dismissed because the prior 26.8.2021 court order approving the sale was regular and conclusive, the applicant failed to prove illegality, lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, fraud or bad faith by the liquidator, the tender process and disclosures were adequate and the sale was not shown to be at undervalue; Section 517 was inapplicable as the decision had been judicially approved and injunctive relief to undo a regular court-approved sale would be unjust and an abuse of process.
- Citation
- WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Applicant: Classic Maritime Inc; 1st Respondent: Lion Diversified Holdings Berhad (In Liquidation); 2nd Respondent: Benapro Sdn Bhd
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 11 October 2022
- Case Number
- WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Post Companies Winding Up Application / Judgment on Motion Under S517 to Set Aside Liquidator's Sale Following Prior S487(3) Court Approval
- Outcome
- Motion dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Liquidator's Powers, Sale of Assets in Liquidation, Related Party Transactions, Judicial Review of Liquidator's Acts, Section 517 Companies Act 2016, Section 487(3) Companies Act 2016
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Classic Maritime Inc
Applicant
Lion Diversified Holdings Berhad (In Liquidation)
1st Respondent
Benapro Sdn Bhd
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Post Companies Winding Up Application / Judgment on Motion Under S517 to Set Aside Liquidator's Sale Following Prior S487(3) Court Approval
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court may set aside or reverse a liquidator's sale already approved by a prior court order dated 26.8.2021
- 2 Whether the sale of 87.96% equity in BRSB to a related party was at undervalue
- 3 Whether any non‑disclosure or conflict of interest vitiated the tender process
Ratio Decidendi
Motion dismissed because the prior 26.8.2021 court order approving the sale was regular and conclusive, the applicant failed to prove illegality, lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, fraud or bad faith by the liquidator, the tender process and disclosures were adequate and the sale was not shown to be at undervalue; Section 517 was inapplicable as the decision had been judicially approved and injunctive relief to undo a regular court-approved sale would be unjust and an abuse of process.
Court Disposition
Motion dismissed
Orders
- Motion dismissed
- Costs of RM15,000 awarded to 1st Respondent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment