WONG WENG KUNG (NRIC NO: 720909-08-5057) 1. ) SYARAZANA ADILA BT HJ ABDULLAH 2. ) TETUAN GULAM, MAEZAH & ADILA

WONG WENG KUNG (NRIC NO: 720909-08-5057) 1. ) SYARAZANA ADILA BT HJ ABDULLAH 2. ) TETUAN GULAM, MAEZAH & ADILA

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding the Sessions Court erred in striking out the suit because the pleadings and documentary evidence (notably the letter dated 2-11-2017) disclosed a reasonable cause of action and raised factual issues—specifically whether the defendants, as stakeholders under the undertaking, breached their duties by releasing the deposit—which must be tried; therefore Order 18 rule 19 was improperly applied.

Citation
WA-12ANCvC-80-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: WONG WENG KUNG; Respondent/defendant: SYARAZANA ADILA BT HJ ABDULLAH; Respondent/defendant: TETUAN GULAM, MAEZAH & ADILA
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 August 2021
Case Number
WA-12ANCvC-80-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (strike Out Application) / Appeal to High Court (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of Sessions Court set aside; matter remitted for full trial before a different Judge; costs in the cause; order of costs at Sessions Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Striking Out Under Order 18 Rule 19, Stakeholder Duties, Undertaking, Breach of Trust, Pleadings and Reasonable Cause of Action
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Property Law Professional Negligence/solicitors' Duties Striking Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 Stakeholder Duties Undertaking Breach of Trust +1 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG WENG KUNG

Appellant/plaintiff

SYARAZANA ADILA BT HJ ABDULLAH

Respondent/defendant

TETUAN GULAM, MAEZAH & ADILA

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (strike Out Application) / Appeal to High Court (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court erred in striking out the plaintiff's claim under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2012
  2. 2 Whether the defendants held the deposit as stakeholder/trustee pursuant to the letter dated 2-11-2017 and breached duties by releasing funds
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action requiring a trial

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding the Sessions Court erred in striking out the suit because the pleadings and documentary evidence (notably the letter dated 2-11-2017) disclosed a reasonable cause of action and raised factual issues—specifically whether the defendants, as stakeholders under the undertaking, breached their duties by releasing the deposit—which must be tried; therefore Order 18 rule 19 was improperly applied.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of Sessions Court set aside; matter remitted for full trial before a different Judge; costs in the cause; order of costs at Sessions Court set aside.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Order striking out by Sessions Court set aside