LEMBAGA KUMPULAN WANG SIMPANAN PEKERJA EDWIN CASSIAN A/L NAGAPPAN @ MARIE

LEMBAGA KUMPULAN WANG SIMPANAN PEKERJA EDWIN CASSIAN A/L NAGAPPAN @ MARIE

The Federal Court held that by operation of section 46 EPF Act 1991 (read with section 44 Contracts Act 1950 principles) the liability of the directors was joint and several such that the creditor was entitled to proceed against any one or more of the joint promisors for the entirety of the judgment sum; the courts below erred in treating 'joint' as halving liability and in holding the bankruptcy notice invalid; appeal allowed and matter remitted to High Court.

Citation
03-3-10/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Parties
Appellant (creditor): Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja; Respondent (judgment Debtor): Edwin Cassian a/l Nagappan @ Marie
Court
W
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 September 2020
Case Number
03-3-10/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Federal Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal and High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; question of law answered in the affirmative; matter remitted to the High Court; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Joint Liability, Joint and Several Liability, Enforcement of Judgment, Bankruptcy Notice, Consent Judgment, Employees Provident Fund Act S46
Source Language
Malay/English
Employment Law Insolvency and Bankruptcy Contract Law Statutory Interpretation Joint Liability Joint and Several Liability Enforcement of Judgment Bankruptcy Notice +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja

Appellant (creditor)

Edwin Cassian a/l Nagappan @ Marie

Respondent (judgment Debtor)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Federal Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal and High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 46 EPF Act 1991 operates to impose joint and several liability on directors so that a creditor may pursue any one or more debtors for the whole judgment sum when the consent judgment is silent on the words 'jointly and severally'
  2. 2 Whether a creditor advancing bankruptcy proceedings against one judgment debtor claiming the whole judgment sum is valid where multiple debtors were jointly adjudged without explicit 'joint and several' wording
  3. 3 Whether courts may read statutory joint and several liability into a silent consent judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court held that by operation of section 46 EPF Act 1991 (read with section 44 Contracts Act 1950 principles) the liability of the directors was joint and several such that the creditor was entitled to proceed against any one or more of the joint promisors for the entirety of the judgment sum; the courts below erred in treating 'joint' as halving liability and in holding the bankruptcy notice invalid; appeal allowed and matter remitted to High Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; question of law answered in the affirmative; matter remitted to the High Court; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Question of law answered in the affirmative that s46 EPF Act 1991 imposes joint and several liability enforceable despite silence in consent judgment