NEWLAKE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 1. ) ZENITH DELIGHT SDN BHD (D1) 2. ) KUMAR JASPAL QUAH & AISHAH (D2) 3. ) How Chee Hong (Steven) (D3) (Amber Kiew Sieh Pei) 4. ) Thian Mung Ching (D4)

NEWLAKE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 1. ) ZENITH DELIGHT SDN BHD (D1) 2. ) KUMAR JASPAL QUAH & AISHAH (D2) 3. ) How Chee Hong (Steven) (D3) (Amber Kiew Sieh Pei) 4. ) Thian Mung Ching (D4)

The Court of Appeal found the High Court erred by narrowing the appellant’s case to a single alleged misrepresentation and by failing to appreciate contemporaneous documents and witness evidence showing a series of misrepresentations and dissipation of funds; the facts supported that D2/D3 occupied a fiduciary position (constructive trust) in respect of monies paid which were used for purposes unrelated to the land acquisition, the SPA was voidable for fraud and rescinded, and the appellants were entitled to the reliefs in the Statement of Claim; appeal allowed and High Court decision set aside.

Citation
W-02(NCvC)(W)-184-01/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Newlake Development Sdn Bhd; 1st Respondent: Zenith Delight Sdn Bhd; 2nd Respondent: Kumar Jaspal Quah & Aishah (sebuah firma); 3rd Respondent: How Chee Hong (Steven); 4th Respondent: Thian Mung Ching
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 September 2025
Case Number
W-02(NCvC)(W)-184-01/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of the High Court set aside; reliefs in the Statement of Claim granted
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Dishonest Assistance, Stakeholder Duty, Settlement Agreement and Rescission, Pleadings and Particulars, Limitation (discovery Rule)
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Tort (deceit/fraud) Equity (constructive Trust, Fiduciary Duties) Professional Negligence Civil Procedure and Evidence Fraudulent Misrepresentation Dishonest Assistance Stakeholder Duty +3 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 7 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Newlake Development Sdn Bhd

Appellant

Zenith Delight Sdn Bhd

1st Respondent

Kumar Jaspal Quah & Aishah (sebuah firma)

2nd Respondent

How Chee Hong (Steven)

3rd Respondent

Thian Mung Ching

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was total failure of consideration disentitling forfeiture
  2. 2 Whether defendants committed fraud or fraudulent misrepresentation
  3. 3 Whether 2nd and 3rd respondents owed a duty of care/professional negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found the High Court erred by narrowing the appellant’s case to a single alleged misrepresentation and by failing to appreciate contemporaneous documents and witness evidence showing a series of misrepresentations and dissipation of funds; the facts supported that D2/D3 occupied a fiduciary position (constructive trust) in respect of monies paid which were used for purposes unrelated to the land acquisition, the SPA was voidable for fraud and rescinded, and the appellants were entitled to the reliefs in the Statement of Claim; appeal allowed and High Court decision set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of the High Court set aside; reliefs in the Statement of Claim granted

Orders

  • Allow the appeal and set aside the decision of the High Court
  • Grant the reliefs prayed for in the Statement of Claim dated 6 June 2014