Daniel Siew for the Petitioner [Messrs Lee Kuang Mang & Co.] Mohd Faiz Bad Rahim for the Respondent [Messrs Rastam Singa & Co.]

Daniel Siew for the Petitioner [Messrs Lee Kuang Mang & Co.] Mohd Faiz Bad Rahim for the Respondent [Messrs Rastam Singa & Co.]

The statutory demand was validly issued and served; the High Court order of 11.7.2019 expressly ordered immediate payment of the sum and was not appealed or set aside and therefore binding; non-payment of a valid statutory demand creates a presumption of inability to pay; the Respondent failed to rebut that presumption or establish a bona fide dispute preventing enforcement of the demand; therefore the winding up petition succeeds and a winding up order is appropriate.

Citation
COMPANIES (WINDING UP) NO. WA-28NCC-141-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: Saga Fire Engineering Sdn Bhd; Respondent: Engineering Protocol Sdn Bhd
Court
WINDING UP
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 September 2020
Case Number
COMPANIES (WINDING UP) NO. WA-28NCC-141-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Petition Under Companies Act 2016 / Judgment (winding Up Order)
Outcome
Winding up order granted against the respondent company
Legal Topics
Winding Up for Inability to Pay Debts, Statutory Demand, Effect of Superior Court Order, Bona Fide Dispute of Debt, Enforcement of CIPAA Adjudication
Source Language
Malay/English
Companies Law Insolvency Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication (cipaa) Winding Up for Inability to Pay Debts Statutory Demand Effect of Superior Court Order +2 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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saga Fire Engineering Sdn Bhd

Petitioner

Engineering Protocol Sdn Bhd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Petition Under Companies Act 2016 / Judgment (winding Up Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory demand was validly issued and complied with formal requirements
  2. 2 Whether the debt claimed is bona fide disputed so as to defeat a winding up petition
  3. 3 Whether the High Court order dated 11.7.2019 required immediate payment and is binding/enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory demand was validly issued and served; the High Court order of 11.7.2019 expressly ordered immediate payment of the sum and was not appealed or set aside and therefore binding; non-payment of a valid statutory demand creates a presumption of inability to pay; the Respondent failed to rebut that presumption or establish a bona fide dispute preventing enforcement of the demand; therefore the winding up petition succeeds and a winding up order is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Winding up order granted against the respondent company

Orders

  • Winding up order made against Engineering Protocol Sdn Bhd
  • Costs awarded to Petitioner in the sum of RM5,000