1. ) PADDA GURTAJ SINGH 2. ) EAST PACIFIC CAPITAL PTE. LTD. 3. ) TUNE STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS LIMITED 1. ) AXIATA GROUP BERHAD 2. ) CELCOM AXIATA BERHAD 3. ) CELCOM MOBILE SDN. BHD. 4. ) TUNE GROUP SDN. BHD. 5. ) LIM KIAN ONN 6. ) CHRISTOPHER

1. ) PADDA GURTAJ SINGH 2. ) EAST PACIFIC CAPITAL PTE. LTD. 3. ) TUNE STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS LIMITED 1. ) AXIATA GROUP BERHAD 2. ) CELCOM AXIATA BERHAD 3. ) CELCOM MOBILE SDN. BHD. 4. ) TUNE GROUP SDN. BHD. 5. ) LIM KIAN ONN 6. ) CHRISTOPHER

Section 19J of the Arbitration Act 2005 empowers the High Court to grant interim measures in relation to arbitration proceedings, including against non-parties where necessary to preserve the status quo and protect the efficacy of the arbitral process; applying that power, the Court granted a prohibitory injunction restraining AGB from including the relevant TTSB shares registered to CMSB in the proposed sale of CAB to Digi (Prayer A), but refused broader intrusive orders (Prayers B and C) as unnecessary or altering the status quo; Enclosures 7 and 8 dismissed; costs fixed.

Citation
WA-24NCC(ARB)-41-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Padda Gurtaj Singh; Plaintiff: East Pacific Capital Pte. Ltd; Plaintiff: Tune Strategic Investments Limited; Defendant: Axiata Group Berhad; Defendant: Celcom Axiata Berhad; Defendant: Celcom Mobile Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant: Tune Group Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant: Lim Kian Onn; Defendant: Christopher Mark Anthony Lankaster; Defendant: Kalimullah bin Masheerul Hassan; Defendant: Jason Jonathan Lo; Defendant: Tune Talk Sdn Bhd
Court
ARB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 March 2022
Case Number
WA-24NCC(ARB)-41-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (commercial Division) Interim Measures Under Arbitration Act 2005 / Interim Application for Injunctive Relief (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Prayer A (injunction against AGB re: Relevant Shares) allowed; Prayers B and C(i)&(ii) refused; Enclosures 7 and 8 dismissed; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Interim Measures Pending Arbitration, Court Jurisdiction Over Non Parties, Shareholders Agreement Disputes, Compulsory Transfer Mechanism, Status Quo Preservation
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Civil Procedure Company Law Contract Law Injunctions Interim Measures Pending Arbitration Court Jurisdiction Over Non Parties Shareholders Agreement Disputes +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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Padda Gurtaj Singh

Plaintiff

East Pacific Capital Pte. Ltd

Plaintiff

Tune Strategic Investments Limited

Plaintiff

Axiata Group Berhad

Defendant

Celcom Axiata Berhad

Defendant

Celcom Mobile Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant

Tune Group Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant

Lim Kian Onn

Defendant

Christopher Mark Anthony Lankaster

Defendant

Kalimullah bin Masheerul Hassan

Defendant

Jason Jonathan Lo

Defendant

Tune Talk Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (commercial Division) Interim Measures Under Arbitration Act 2005 / Interim Application for Injunctive Relief (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court may grant interim measures under the Arbitration Act 2005 against a non-party to the arbitration agreement
  2. 2 Whether AGB's proposed sale of CAB (including shares ultimately registered to CMSB) constitutes an 'Event' or 'Material Breach' under the shareholders agreement
  3. 3 Whether an undertaking by CAB/CMSB suffices to protect plaintiffs' interests or whether injunctive relief is necessary to preserve status quo

Ratio Decidendi

Section 19J of the Arbitration Act 2005 empowers the High Court to grant interim measures in relation to arbitration proceedings, including against non-parties where necessary to preserve the status quo and protect the efficacy of the arbitral process; applying that power, the Court granted a prohibitory injunction restraining AGB from including the relevant TTSB shares registered to CMSB in the proposed sale of CAB to Digi (Prayer A), but refused broader intrusive orders (Prayers B and C) as unnecessary or altering the status quo; Enclosures 7 and 8 dismissed; costs fixed.

Court Disposition

Prayer A (injunction against AGB re: Relevant Shares) allowed; Prayers B and C(i)&(ii) refused; Enclosures 7 and 8 dismissed; costs awarded.

Orders

  • AGB is prohibited from including the Relevant Shares in TTSB registered in the name of CMSB in the proposed sale of AGB's entire shareholding in CAB to Digi (injunction granted)
  • Prayers B and C(i) and C(ii) are dismissed (no injunctions granted against CAB/CMSB directors or MVNO agreement changes)