Lee Wei Chiek Well Light Solutions Sdn Bhd

Lee Wei Chiek Well Light Solutions Sdn Bhd

The High Court held that the moratorium under s.410(c) Companies Act 2016 applies only to the company and does not prevent proceedings against a personal guarantor; the appellant failed to produce credible evidence or raise triable issues to rebut the prima facie case established by invoices, bounced cheques and demand; therefore Order 14 summary judgment was properly granted and the Sessions Court decision was affirmed.

Citation
BL-12A-20-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Lee Wei Chiek; Respondent: Well Light Solutions Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 March 2022
Case Number
BL-12A-20-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sessions Court Summary Judgment (order 14 Rules of Court 2012) / High Court Judgment on Appeal (decision Dated 28 March 2022)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court summary judgment upheld
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14), Personal Guarantee, Judicial Management, Stay of Proceedings, Estoppel, Demand for Payment
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Companies Law Debt Recovery Summary Judgment (order 14) Personal Guarantee Judicial Management Stay of Proceedings +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Wei Chiek

Appellant

Well Light Solutions Sdn Bhd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sessions Court Summary Judgment (order 14 Rules of Court 2012) / High Court Judgment on Appeal (decision Dated 28 March 2022)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether filing and hearing of Order 14 summary judgment was premature due to pending judicial management/winding up proceedings under s.410(c) Companies Act 2016
  2. 2 Whether the appellant executed or was bound by the Guarantee Agreement
  3. 3 Whether any alleged release of the principal debtor (the company) or defects in goods estopped the respondent from claiming against the guarantor

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the moratorium under s.410(c) Companies Act 2016 applies only to the company and does not prevent proceedings against a personal guarantor; the appellant failed to produce credible evidence or raise triable issues to rebut the prima facie case established by invoices, bounced cheques and demand; therefore Order 14 summary judgment was properly granted and the Sessions Court decision was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court summary judgment upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Sessions Court Judge dated 10 December 2021 affirmed