1. ) TEY SUI KIAT 2. ) TEY BOON GIOW & SONS SDN BHD () 1. ) Lim Aik @ Lim Yeok 2. ) Sin Hai Estate Berhad (dalam likuidasi) 3. ) Sing Lian Sdn Bhd (Dalam Likuidasi) 4. ) Lim Jit Kim & Lim Tian Jee 5. ) Tan Yian Ping 6. ) Lim Ah Sang 7. ) Ta

1. ) TEY SUI KIAT 2. ) TEY BOON GIOW & SONS SDN BHD () 1. ) Lim Aik @ Lim Yeok 2. ) Sin Hai Estate Berhad (dalam likuidasi) 3. ) Sing Lian Sdn Bhd (Dalam Likuidasi) 4. ) Lim Jit Kim & Lim Tian Jee 5. ) Tan Yian Ping 6. ) Lim Ah Sang 7. ) Ta

The Court held the Winding Up Court's earlier decision refusing to ratify the appointment/payment was final and, by application of issue estoppel, barred the liquidator's subsequent claim for fees relating to the period covered by that decision; subsequent documentary evidence relating to a different company's liquidation was irrelevant to these appeals; the High Court decisions were set aside and the matter remitted to the Winding Up Court for redetermination of the liquidator's fees for the limited claimable period after the liquidator complied with the security requirement (from 21.2.2012 to 7.9.2012), with remuneration to be determined on a fair and reasonable basis (not necessarily...

Citation
M-02(IM)-1665-09/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Liquidator (sin Hai Estate Bhd): Lim Aik @ Lim Yeok; Respondent: Goh Siew Koon @ Eng Sing Kuan; Respondent: Tey Liong Seng; Respondent / Appellant (in Separate Appeal): Tey Sui Kiat; Respondent (company in Liquidation): Sin Hai Estate Berhad (In Liquidation); Respondent (company in Liquidation): Sing Lian Sdn. Bhd. (In Liquidation); Respondent / Appellant (in Separate Appeal): Tey Boon Giow & Sons Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent / Petitioner in Related Winding Up Matter: Lim Jit Kim @ Lim Tian Jee; Respondent / Petitioner in Related Winding Up Matter: Tan Yian Ping
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 May 2026
Case Number
M-02(IM)-1665-09/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals From Winding Up Court and High Court / Court of Appeal Decision (supporting Judgment) Remitting Matter to Winding Up Court for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part. High Court decisions dated 4.7.2022 and 12.8.2022 set aside in part; matter remitted to Winding Up Court before a different judge/judicial commissioner to re-determine liquidator's fees within statutory and equitable limits.
Legal Topics
Liquidator Remuneration, Res Judicata / Issue Estoppel, Admission of Further Evidence on Appeal, Unjust Enrichment, Quantum Meruit, Statutory Interpretation, Court Supervision of Liquidators
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Equity Liquidator Remuneration Res Judicata / Issue Estoppel Admission of Further Evidence on Appeal Unjust Enrichment +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 8 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lim Aik @ Lim Yeok

Appellant / Liquidator (sin Hai Estate Bhd)

Goh Siew Koon @ Eng Sing Kuan

Respondent

Tey Liong Seng

Respondent

Tey Sui Kiat

Respondent / Appellant (in Separate Appeal)

Sin Hai Estate Berhad (In Liquidation)

Respondent (company in Liquidation)

Sing Lian Sdn. Bhd. (In Liquidation)

Respondent (company in Liquidation)

Tey Boon Giow & Sons Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent / Appellant (in Separate Appeal)

Lim Jit Kim @ Lim Tian Jee

Respondent / Petitioner in Related Winding Up Matter

Tan Yian Ping

Respondent / Petitioner in Related Winding Up Matter

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals From Winding Up Court and High Court / Court of Appeal Decision (supporting Judgment) Remitting Matter to Winding Up Court for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party relying on evidence arising after the lower court decision must prove its relevance before relying on it in the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Winding Up Court's earlier refusal to ratify appointment/payment and absence of appeal bars subsequent application for liquidator's fees by issue estoppel (second limb of res judicata)
  3. 3 Whether liquidator's fees can be allowed under s232(3)(c) CA(1965) read with r142(3) WUR/Table C, on time-cost, unjust enrichment, or s71 Contracts Act 1950/quantum meruit

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the Winding Up Court's earlier decision refusing to ratify the appointment/payment was final and, by application of issue estoppel, barred the liquidator's subsequent claim for fees relating to the period covered by that decision; subsequent documentary evidence relating to a different company's liquidation was irrelevant to these appeals; the High Court decisions were set aside and the matter remitted to the Winding Up Court for redetermination of the liquidator's fees for the limited claimable period after the liquidator complied with the security requirement (from 21.2.2012 to 7.9.2012), with remuneration to be determined on a fair and reasonable basis (not necessarily...

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part. High Court decisions dated 4.7.2022 and 12.8.2022 set aside in part; matter remitted to Winding Up Court before a different judge/judicial commissioner to re-determine liquidator's fees within statutory and equitable limits.

Orders

  • Set aside High Court's Decision dated 4.7.2022 and High Court's Decision dated 12.8.2022 (insofar as they related to remitted issues)
  • Remit the matter to the Winding Up Court to re-determine Mr Lim's remuneration as liquidator before another Judge/Judicial Commissioner