WANG ZHI YU & ORS TEO SUNG NGIAP & 6 ORS

WANG ZHI YU & ORS TEO SUNG NGIAP & 6 ORS

The court dismissed all discovery and further and better particulars applications because the applicants failed to meet the necessity threshold under the Rules of Court: they did not show the documents were necessary for disposing fairly of the proceedings or saving costs, nor that the documents were in the possession, custody or power of the opposing party; the requests amounted to fishing for evidence and were oppressive given their timing shortly before trial; particulars sought were evidentiary not material facts; consequently the applications were refused and the matters were ordered to proceed to trial without further delay.

Citation
WA-22NCC-443-08/2019 heard together with WA-22NCC-560-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (1st Plaintiff in Suit 443): WANG ZHI YU; Plaintiff (2nd Plaintiff in Suit 443; Plaintiff and Executor in Suit 560): TEH WEI KIAN; Defendant (1st Defendant): TEO SUNG NGIAP; Defendant (2nd Defendant): TEO KIM CHUANG; Defendant (3rd Defendant): TEO SOON KEE; Defendant (4th Defendant): GARY KUO YIN HO; Defendant (bvi Company Alleged Nominee): ROSA BIANCA INVESTMENT LIMITED; Defendant (respondent Company in Share Dispute): GOLDEN PLUS HOLDINGS BERHAD; Defendant (executive/executor and Alleged Interested Party): TEH CHIAO EING VALARIE; Defendant (interested Party): WU KWOK YING MARIA
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 August 2020
Case Number
WA-22NCC-443-08/2019 heard together with WA-22NCC-560-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial Suits Concerning Company Shares, Nominee Arrangements, Trust and Probate Issues; Interlocutory Applications / Interlocutory Appeals Against Refusal of Discovery and Further and Better Particulars Made Shortly Before Trial; Pre Trial Stage
Outcome
All Discovery and Further and Better Particulars applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Discovery, Further and Better Particulars, Nominee/share Ownership, Fraudulent Transfers, Injunctions, Particulars of Pleading
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Probate Fraud Discovery Further and Better Particulars Nominee/share Ownership +3 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WANG ZHI YU

Plaintiff (1st Plaintiff in Suit 443)

TEH WEI KIAN

Plaintiff (2nd Plaintiff in Suit 443; Plaintiff and Executor in Suit 560)

TEO SUNG NGIAP

Defendant (1st Defendant)

TEO KIM CHUANG

Defendant (2nd Defendant)

TEO SOON KEE

Defendant (3rd Defendant)

GARY KUO YIN HO

Defendant (4th Defendant)

ROSA BIANCA INVESTMENT LIMITED

Defendant (bvi Company Alleged Nominee)

GOLDEN PLUS HOLDINGS BERHAD

Defendant (respondent Company in Share Dispute)

TEH CHIAO EING VALARIE

Defendant (executive/executor and Alleged Interested Party)

WU KWOK YING MARIA

Defendant (interested Party)

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial Suits Concerning Company Shares, Nominee Arrangements, Trust and Probate Issues; Interlocutory Applications / Interlocutory Appeals Against Refusal of Discovery and Further and Better Particulars Made Shortly Before Trial; Pre Trial Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether discovery orders should be made under Rules of Court O.24 r.8 and r.13(1) based on necessity
  2. 2 Whether further and better particulars should be ordered under O.18 r.12(3)
  3. 3 Whether the documents sought were in the possession, custody or power of the party from whom discovery was sought

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed all discovery and further and better particulars applications because the applicants failed to meet the necessity threshold under the Rules of Court: they did not show the documents were necessary for disposing fairly of the proceedings or saving costs, nor that the documents were in the possession, custody or power of the opposing party; the requests amounted to fishing for evidence and were oppressive given their timing shortly before trial; particulars sought were evidentiary not material facts; consequently the applications were refused and the matters were ordered to proceed to trial without further delay.

Court Disposition

All Discovery and Further and Better Particulars applications dismissed

Orders

  • Discovery applications dismissed with costs
  • Further and Better Particulars applications dismissed with costs