DONG MOON SOO 1. ) SNC PROCESS SERVICES SDN BHD 2. ) CHO SEUNG JIN

DONG MOON SOO 1. ) SNC PROCESS SERVICES SDN BHD 2. ) CHO SEUNG JIN

The SS Order for the originating summons was properly granted and complied with in substance; substituted service of the judgment was effected and the judgment was deemed served on 26.4.2022; the 2nd Defendant filed his application on 14.5.2024, an inordinate two-year delay without satisfactory explanation; the 2nd...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-24NCC-348-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dong Moon Soo; Defendant: SNC Process Services Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Cho Seung Jin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 January 2025
Case Number
WA-24NCC-348-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Oppression Action (section 346, Companies Act 2016) / Post Judgment Application to Set Aside Substituted Service Orders and Judgment (application Dismissed)
Outcome
Enclosure 33 dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Substituted Service, Setting Aside Judgment, Oppression Under Companies Law, Delay and Procedural Timeliness
Company Law Civil Procedure Service of Process Substituted Service Setting Aside Judgment Oppression Under Companies Law Delay and Procedural Timeliness

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dong Moon Soo

Plaintiff

SNC Process Services Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Cho Seung Jin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Oppression Action (section 346, Companies Act 2016) / Post Judgment Application to Set Aside Substituted Service Orders and Judgment (application Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order for substituted service of the originating summons was properly granted
  2. 2 Whether the judgment obtained by originating summons should be set aside
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Defendant demonstrated a meritorious defence on the merits

Ratio Decidendi

The SS Order for the originating summons was properly granted and complied with in substance; substituted service of the judgment was effected and the judgment was deemed served on 26.4.2022; the 2nd Defendant filed his application on 14.5.2024, an inordinate two-year delay without satisfactory explanation; the 2nd Defendant failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence. Therefore Enclosure 33 must be dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Enclosure 33 dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Enclosure 33 (2nd Defendant's application to set aside substituted service orders and judgment) dismissed with costs
  • Judgment dated 18.11.2021 remains in effect and was deemed served on 26.4.2022