HADRONS CONSULTING SDN. BHD. 1. ) LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. 2. ) BERKAT GAGAH SDN. BHD. 3. ) MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD. 4. ) BENTAYAN PROPERTIES SDN. BHD. 5. ) LIPUTAN CANGGIH SDN. BHD. 6. ) TETUAN ABRAHAM OOI & PARTNERS PENCELAH 1. ) K&A Capit

HADRONS CONSULTING SDN. BHD. 1. ) LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. 2. ) BERKAT GAGAH SDN. BHD. 3. ) MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD. 4. ) BENTAYAN PROPERTIES SDN. BHD. 5. ) LIPUTAN CANGGIH SDN. BHD. 6. ) TETUAN ABRAHAM OOI & PARTNERS PENCELAH 1. ) K&A Capit

On the balance of probabilities the court found Hadrons performed its contractual obligations and was entitled to enforce the CSAA and Settlement Agreement computations; the companies failed to discharge the evidential burden to prove breach of fiduciary duty or unjust enrichment, produced no contemporaneous evidence, and in some respects were estopped/res judicata from relitigating earlier-resolved matters; accordingly judgment entered for Hadrons awarding outstanding cash RM26,287,971.75, contra property valued RM5,000,000, reimbursement RM599,488, indemnity for costs of Suit 534, directions to stakeholder to release funds, retain RM3,000,000 for two years, and global costs RM250,000...

Citation
WA-22NCvC-215-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (suit 215); Defendant (suit 227): HADRONS CONSULTING SDN BHD; Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227): LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.; Defendant (suit 215): BERKAT GAGAH SDN. BHD.; Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227): MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD.; Defendant (suit 215): BENTAYAN PROPERTIES SDN. BHD.; Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227): LIPUTAN CANGGIH SDN. BHD.; Defendant (stakeholder) (suit 215): TETUAN ABRAHAM OOI & PARTNERS; Defendant (suit 227): FOS ADVISORY SERVICES SDN BHD; Defendant (suit 227): HADRONS CAPITAL SDN BHD; Defendant (suit 227): KOAY KANG CHUWAN; Defendant (suit 227): PRASAD RATHINASAMY; Defendant (suit 227): KOAY HAN KERN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Case Number
WA-22NCvC-215-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Civil Suits WA 22 NCVC 215 05/2020 and WA 22 NCVC 227 05/2020 Concerning Enforcement of Consultancy Fees and Related Counterclaims / Judgment at Trial; Appeals Filed Against Decision on 23.01.2025
Outcome
Judgment for Hadrons Consulting Sdn Bhd in Suit 215; Suit 227 dismissed.
Legal Topics
Consultancy Fees, Performance Incentives, Scheme of Arrangement, Indemnity, Res Judicata and Issue Estoppel, Stakeholder/co Mingled Account, Contra Property
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Fiduciary Duties / Equity Company Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Consultancy Fees Performance Incentives Scheme of Arrangement +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HADRONS CONSULTING SDN BHD

Plaintiff (suit 215); Defendant (suit 227)

LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227)

BERKAT GAGAH SDN. BHD.

Defendant (suit 215)

MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD.

Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227)

BENTAYAN PROPERTIES SDN. BHD.

Defendant (suit 215)

LIPUTAN CANGGIH SDN. BHD.

Defendant (suit 215); Plaintiff (suit 227)

TETUAN ABRAHAM OOI & PARTNERS

Defendant (stakeholder) (suit 215)

FOS ADVISORY SERVICES SDN BHD

Defendant (suit 227)

HADRONS CAPITAL SDN BHD

Defendant (suit 227)

KOAY KANG CHUWAN

Defendant (suit 227)

PRASAD RATHINASAMY

Defendant (suit 227)

KOAY HAN KERN

Defendant (suit 227)

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Civil Suits WA 22 NCVC 215 05/2020 and WA 22 NCVC 227 05/2020 Concerning Enforcement of Consultancy Fees and Related Counterclaims / Judgment at Trial; Appeals Filed Against Decision on 23.01.2025

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Hadrons was entitled to consultancy fees and performance incentives under the CSAA and Settlement Agreement
  2. 2 Whether the defendants/plaintiffs in Suit 227 established breach of fiduciary duty or unjust enrichment
  3. 3 Whether proceeds from various lands and parties (including Liputan Canggih and Ringgit Exotika) formed part of recovery

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court found Hadrons performed its contractual obligations and was entitled to enforce the CSAA and Settlement Agreement computations; the companies failed to discharge the evidential burden to prove breach of fiduciary duty or unjust enrichment, produced no contemporaneous evidence, and in some respects were estopped/res judicata from relitigating earlier-resolved matters; accordingly judgment entered for Hadrons awarding outstanding cash RM26,287,971.75, contra property valued RM5,000,000, reimbursement RM599,488, indemnity for costs of Suit 534, directions to stakeholder to release funds, retain RM3,000,000 for two years, and global costs RM250,000...

Court Disposition

Judgment for Hadrons Consulting Sdn Bhd in Suit 215; Suit 227 dismissed.

Orders

  • Hadrons Consulting entitled to outstanding cash RM26,287,971.75
  • Hadrons Consulting entitled to payment in kind via contra property: The Stride Strata Office Bukit Bintang City Centre Unit D3-09-01 valued RM5,000,000