RATNAVEL A/L PACKIRISAMY & 31 LAGI KOPERASI NLFCS BERHAD

RATNAVEL A/L PACKIRISAMY & 31 LAGI KOPERASI NLFCS BERHAD

The Deed of Trust together with undisputed evidence that participants paid the purchase price established an express and resulting trust; the defendant's subsequent profit‑sharing agreements, disposals and sales to third parties without informing or accounting to beneficiaries constituted unconscionable conduct and breach of fiduciary duties giving rise to constructive trust and equitable fraud; limitation did not bar the claim because s.22(1) preserves beneficiaries' remedies for equitable fraud and recovery of trust property; equitable remedies of restitution, account and caveats therefore ordered and damages to be assessed.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-561-09/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiffs: Ratnavel a/l Packirisamy & Others; Defendant: Koperasi NLFCS Berhad
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 January 2020
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-561-09/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (trust/equity/proprietary Claim) / High Court Judgment (grounds of Judgment); Appeals Noted
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim allowed; Defendant's counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Express Trust, Resulting Trust, Constructive Trust, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Equitable Fraud, Accounting and Restitution, Limitation and Laches, Registrar's Caveat, Assessment of Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Trusts and Trustees Equity Property Law Civil Procedure Limitation Law Express Trust Resulting Trust Constructive Trust +6 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ratnavel a/l Packirisamy & Others

Plaintiffs

Koperasi NLFCS Berhad

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (trust/equity/proprietary Claim) / High Court Judgment (grounds of Judgment); Appeals Noted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs have locus standi
  2. 2 Whether participants paid entire purchase price
  3. 3 Whether participants entitled to approx. 1/4 acre each

Ratio Decidendi

The Deed of Trust together with undisputed evidence that participants paid the purchase price established an express and resulting trust; the defendant's subsequent profit‑sharing agreements, disposals and sales to third parties without informing or accounting to beneficiaries constituted unconscionable conduct and breach of fiduciary duties giving rise to constructive trust and equitable fraud; limitation did not bar the claim because s.22(1) preserves beneficiaries' remedies for equitable fraud and recovery of trust property; equitable remedies of restitution, account and caveats therefore ordered and damages to be assessed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim allowed; Defendant's counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' claim allowed and Defendant found to have held the land on express, resulting and constructive trusts for participants and to have breached fiduciary duties
  • Defendant ordered to account for and restore all profits obtained from the Temiang Land Scheme/development and to render a full and true account if no profits are demonstrable