Ewe Beng Leong (No. KP:690829-07-5073) 1. Ewe Hoo Chye (No. KP:651204-07-5581) 2. Teng Lai Beng (No. KP:660918-07-5596) 3. Duaria Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat: 302601-M)
The court held the second set of orders seeking to vary the consent judgment (discharging named auditors, appointing new auditors, and specifying financial year end dates) were impermissible and an abuse of process; however the auditors' consideration of a Market Approach was a material departure from the agreed scope and therefore that part of the valuation was not binding — the court ordered the auditor to revise the report excluding the Market Approach; allegations of partiality and incomplete due diligence were rejected on the evidence and cross-examination; enclosure 109 was stayed/permanently stayed after a revised report was served.
- Citation
- PA-22NCvC-235-11/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Ewe Beng Leong; 1st Defendant: Ewe Hoo Chye; 2nd Defendant: Teng Lai Beng; 3rd Defendant: Duaria Sdn Bhd
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 2020
- Case Number
- PA-22NCvC-235-11/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Litigation Application to Set Aside Auditor's Report Arising From Consent Judgment / Hearing on Interlocutory Application and Judgment (application Filed 23 01 2020; Judgment 12 03 2021)
- Outcome
- Application partly allowed in respect of challenge to use of Market Approach; application to vary consent judgment and replace auditors refused as an abuse of process
- Legal Topics
- Consent Judgment, Expert Determination, Share Valuation, Auditor's Report, Variation of Consent Order, Cross Examination of Expert
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ewe Beng Leong
Plaintiff
Ewe Hoo Chye
1st Defendant
Teng Lai Beng
2nd Defendant
Duaria Sdn Bhd
3rd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Litigation Application to Set Aside Auditor's Report Arising From Consent Judgment / Hearing on Interlocutory Application and Judgment (application Filed 23 01 2020; Judgment 12 03 2021)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court may set aside or vary an auditors' valuation made pursuant to a consent judgment
- 2 Whether the auditors materially departed from their agreed scope by adopting an unagreed Market Approach
- 3 Whether allegations of partiality or incomplete due diligence vitiate the auditors' valuation
Ratio Decidendi
The court held the second set of orders seeking to vary the consent judgment (discharging named auditors, appointing new auditors, and specifying financial year end dates) were impermissible and an abuse of process; however the auditors' consideration of a Market Approach was a material departure from the agreed scope and therefore that part of the valuation was not binding — the court ordered the auditor to revise the report excluding the Market Approach; allegations of partiality and incomplete due diligence were rejected on the evidence and cross-examination; enclosure 109 was stayed/permanently stayed after a revised report was served.
Court Disposition
Application partly allowed in respect of challenge to use of Market Approach; application to vary consent judgment and replace auditors refused as an abuse of process
Orders
- Second set of orders seeking discharge of named auditors, appointment of new auditors and specification of financial year end dates refused
- Market Approach excluded from valuation: auditor Teh Eng Aun & Co ordered to prepare and serve a revised auditor's report recalculating share value using only the agreed Asset and Income Approaches
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment