PEAK MODEL SDN. BHD. 1. ) HATI JANAKUASA SDN. BHD. 2. ) GONG WEI 3. ) LIU JIANGLIN

PEAK MODEL SDN. BHD. 1. ) HATI JANAKUASA SDN. BHD. 2. ) GONG WEI 3. ) LIU JIANGLIN

Disqualification refused because applicant failed to show a solicitor‑client relationship, possession or risk of misuse of confidential information, or an objective appearance of impropriety; alleged lack of authority is an internal corporate dispute and not a recognised ground for disqualification. Stay under s.10 Arbitration Act 2005 refused because this is a multi‑party dispute involving non‑signatories and central tortious claims inextricably linked to the claims against the signatory, so granting a stay would cause fragmentation and a real risk of inconsistent findings; Clause 17.2 and the intertwined factual matrix support hearing all claims in one forum.

Citation
BA-22NCvC-285-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Peak Model Sdn. Bhd.; 1st Defendant: Hati Janakuasa Sdn. Bhd.; 2nd Defendant: Gong Wei; 3rd Defendant: Liu Jianglin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 February 2026
Case Number
BA-22NCvC-285-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit – Shareholder Dispute Arising From Shareholders' Agreement and Alleged Failure to Distribute Dividends / Interlocutory Stage – Determination of Two Interlocutory Applications (disqualification of Solicitors and Stay Pending Arbitration); Judgment Delivered (applications Dismissed); Appeals Filed to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Both interlocutory applications dismissed by the High Court.
Legal Topics
Disqualification of Counsel, Stay Pending Arbitration (s.10 Arbitration Act 2005), Scope of Arbitration Clauses, Non Signatories and Privity of Contract, Split Litigation and Fragmentation, Authority of Corporate Representatives, Appearance of Impropriety, Interference/inducement/conspiracy Torts, Jurisdiction Clause (clause 17.2 of Shareholders' Agreement
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Law Company Law Civil Procedure Professional Conduct of Solicitors Tort Law Disqualification of Counsel Stay Pending Arbitration (s.10 Arbitration Act 2005) Scope of Arbitration Clauses +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 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peak Model Sdn. Bhd.

Plaintiff

Hati Janakuasa Sdn. Bhd.

1st Defendant

Gong Wei

2nd Defendant

Liu Jianglin

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit – Shareholder Dispute Arising From Shareholders' Agreement and Alleged Failure to Distribute Dividends / Interlocutory Stage – Determination of Two Interlocutory Applications (disqualification of Solicitors and Stay Pending Arbitration); Judgment Delivered (applications Dismissed); Appeals Filed to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Messrs Zain & Co should be disqualified for conflict of interest, lack of authority or appearance of impropriety
  2. 2 Whether alleged lack of authority of the 1st Defendant to instruct solicitors is a ground for disqualification
  3. 3 Whether requirements of s.10 Arbitration Act 2005 are satisfied to grant a stay

Ratio Decidendi

Disqualification refused because applicant failed to show a solicitor‑client relationship, possession or risk of misuse of confidential information, or an objective appearance of impropriety; alleged lack of authority is an internal corporate dispute and not a recognised ground for disqualification. Stay under s.10 Arbitration Act 2005 refused because this is a multi‑party dispute involving non‑signatories and central tortious claims inextricably linked to the claims against the signatory, so granting a stay would cause fragmentation and a real risk of inconsistent findings; Clause 17.2 and the intertwined factual matrix support hearing all claims in one forum.

Court Disposition

Both interlocutory applications dismissed by the High Court.

Orders

  • Enclosure 28 (Plaintiff's application to disqualify Messrs Zain & Co) dismissed
  • Enclosure 9 (1st Defendant's application for stay under s.10 Arbitration Act 2005) dismissed