IFCI Limited Bishopgate Capital Limited dan 1 Lagi

IFCI Limited Bishopgate Capital Limited dan 1 Lagi

The strike out application was dismissed because the plaintiff provided a bona fide explanation for joining the 1st Defendant as a proforma party in the Delhi DRT Case, the causes of action and reliefs in the two proceedings were not identical and thus did not pose a real risk of conflicting judgments, the Malaysian...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-22NCC-705-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: IFCI LIMITED; 1st Defendant: BISHOPGATE CAPITAL LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: ARCHIPELAGO INSURANCE LIMITED
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 June 2021
Case Number
WA-22NCC-705-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (commercial Division) / Pre Trial; Striking Out Application Heard and Dismissed; Trial Listed (less Than Five Weeks Away at Judgment)
Outcome
Enclosure 64 dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Multiplicity/duplicity of Proceedings, Abuse of Process, Striking Out Under Order 18 R 19 and Order 92 R 4 ROC 2012, Stay of Proceedings, Proforma Parties
Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Commercial Law Insurance Law Multiplicity/duplicity of Proceedings Abuse of Process Striking Out Under Order 18 R 19 and Order 92 R 4 ROC 2012 Stay of Proceedings +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IFCI LIMITED

Plaintiff

BISHOPGATE CAPITAL LIMITED

1st Defendant

ARCHIPELAGO INSURANCE LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (commercial Division) / Pre Trial; Striking Out Application Heard and Dismissed; Trial Listed (less Than Five Weeks Away at Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ and claim should be struck out for multiplicity of proceedings/abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether a stay should be granted pending discontinuance of foreign proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the inclusion of the 1st Defendant as a proforma party in the Delhi DRT Case constitutes abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The strike out application was dismissed because the plaintiff provided a bona fide explanation for joining the 1st Defendant as a proforma party in the Delhi DRT Case, the causes of action and reliefs in the two proceedings were not identical and thus did not pose a real risk of conflicting judgments, the Malaysian suit was filed first and was at an advanced stage, and striking out or staying the action would be a disproportionate exercise of the court's drastic power.

Court Disposition

Enclosure 64 dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Enclosure 64 dismissed
  • No order as to costs