OSSG MANAGEMENT SDN BHD (Company No.: 1226997-A) 1. PLATINUM EDEN ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD (Company No.: 1062202-P) 2. MESSRS ABU TALIB SHAHROM (Sued as a firm)

OSSG MANAGEMENT SDN BHD (Company No.: 1226997-A) 1. PLATINUM EDEN ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD (Company No.: 1062202-P) 2. MESSRS ABU TALIB SHAHROM (Sued as a firm)

The committal application was dismissed because the Applicant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st Respondent willfully refused or neglected to pay the Settlement Sum and had the means to pay, and because the Consent Judgment lacked the mandatory penal endorsement required by Order 45 r 7(4); additionally viable alternative enforcement remedies existed making committal inappropriate.

Citation
WA-22NCC-378-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: OSSG MANAGEMENT SDN BHD; Defendant/1st Respondent: PLATINUM EDEN ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD; Defendant/2nd Respondent (firm): MESSRS ABU TALIB SHAHROM; 2nd Respondent (individual): ABDUL MUNAF BIN SULTAN ABDUL KADIR; 3rd Respondent (individual): MUHAMMAD TAQIUDDIN BIN HALIM
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
4 May 2021
Case Number
WA-22NCC-378-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Committal Application Under Order 52 Rule 4 (civil Enforcement) / Interlocutory Application for Order of Committal After Leave Granted
Outcome
Applicant's committal application dismissed
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Consent Judgment Enforcement, Penal Endorsement (penal Notice), Refusal or Neglect to Pay, Ability to Pay, COVID 19 / MCO as Excuse, Alternative Enforcement Remedies
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Contract Enforcement Company Law Judgment Enforcement Committal Proceedings Consent Judgment Enforcement Penal Endorsement (penal Notice) +4 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OSSG MANAGEMENT SDN BHD

Applicant/plaintiff

PLATINUM EDEN ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD

Defendant/1st Respondent

MESSRS ABU TALIB SHAHROM

Defendant/2nd Respondent (firm)

ABDUL MUNAF BIN SULTAN ABDUL KADIR

2nd Respondent (individual)

MUHAMMAD TAQIUDDIN BIN HALIM

3rd Respondent (individual)

Procedural Posture

Committal Application Under Order 52 Rule 4 (civil Enforcement) / Interlocutory Application for Order of Committal After Leave Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to pay the Settlement Sum under the Consent Judgment amounted to contempt by way of refusal or neglect
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant proved beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st Respondent had the ability to pay but willfully refused to do so
  3. 3 Whether the Consent Judgment bore the mandatory penal endorsement required by Order 45 r 7(4) such that committal proceedings could be maintained

Ratio Decidendi

The committal application was dismissed because the Applicant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st Respondent willfully refused or neglected to pay the Settlement Sum and had the means to pay, and because the Consent Judgment lacked the mandatory penal endorsement required by Order 45 r 7(4); additionally viable alternative enforcement remedies existed making committal inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Applicant's committal application dismissed

Orders

  • Applicant's application for committal under Order 52 Rule 4 dismissed with costs to the Respondents