MUJIBUDDIN BIN ZAINUDDIN 1. ) A. GHANI BIN MD TAHIR 2. ) MOHAMAD HAFIDH BIN ABDUL GHANI

MUJIBUDDIN BIN ZAINUDDIN 1. ) A. GHANI BIN MD TAHIR 2. ) MOHAMAD HAFIDH BIN ABDUL GHANI

Defendants failed to establish any bona fide triable issue on affidavit or produce contemporaneous documentary proof that Plaintiff consented to the payment of his RM4.5m dividend to third parties; denials and unsubstantiated assertions are insufficient under Order 14, therefore summary judgment for the Plaintiff is appropriate.

Citation
BA-22NCvC-31-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mujibuddin bin Zainuddin; First Defendant: A. Ghani bin Md. Tahir; Second Defendant: Mohamad Hafidh bin Abdul Ghani
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 August 2022
Case Number
BA-22NCvC-31-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Shareholder/dividend Dispute / Summary Judgment Under Order 14 Rules of Court 2012 (interlocutory Decision)
Outcome
Summary judgment allowed in favour of the Plaintiff; application to add new defendants dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14), Dividend Distribution, Shareholder Advancement, Joinder of Parties, Counterclaim for Overpayment
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Civil Procedure Shareholder Dispute Debt/monetary Claim Fraud/deceit Summary Judgment (order 14) Dividend Distribution Shareholder Advancement +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mujibuddin bin Zainuddin

Plaintiff

A. Ghani bin Md. Tahir

First Defendant

Mohamad Hafidh bin Abdul Ghani

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Shareholder/dividend Dispute / Summary Judgment Under Order 14 Rules of Court 2012 (interlocutory Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Plaintiff was entitled to RM4,500,000 as dividend
  2. 2 Whether the dividend was lawfully paid to Plaintiff or third parties
  3. 3 Whether Defendants raised a bona fide triable issue to defeat summary judgment under O.14

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to establish any bona fide triable issue on affidavit or produce contemporaneous documentary proof that Plaintiff consented to the payment of his RM4.5m dividend to third parties; denials and unsubstantiated assertions are insufficient under Order 14, therefore summary judgment for the Plaintiff is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment allowed in favour of the Plaintiff; application to add new defendants dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment in favour of Plaintiff for RM4,500,000 awarded with costs of RM7,000.00 (subject to allocator fee)
  • Application to add four named third parties as defendants dismissed with costs of RM2,000.00 (subject to allocator fee)