1. TAN KEAN HUAT 2. KONG HON KONG CHAN BAN HIN

1. TAN KEAN HUAT 2. KONG HON KONG CHAN BAN HIN

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Sessions Court decision: the amended statement of claim prima facie disclosed at least one reasonable cause of action (misrepresentation and related claims) and raised serious factual issues (nexus, representations, reliance, unjust enrichment and potential lifting of the veil) that require full trial; striking out is only appropriate in plain and obvious cases and the lower court did not err in exercising its discretion to refuse summary dismissal.

Citation
WA-12ANCC-59-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Tan Kean Huat; Appellant/defendant: Kong Hon Kong; Respondent/plaintiff: Chan Ban Hin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 August 2021
Case Number
WA-12ANCC-59-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Under O.18 R.19 (rules of Court 2012)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Striking Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 ROC 2012, Misrepresentation, Cause of Action, Legitimate Expectation, Unjust Enrichment/quantum Meruit, Lifting/piercing the Corporate Veil, Abuse of Process, Locus Standi
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Tort (misrepresentation) Equity and Restitution (unjust Enrichment) Company Law Striking Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 ROC 2012 Misrepresentation Cause of Action +5 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Kean Huat

Appellant/defendant

Kong Hon Kong

Appellant/defendant

Chan Ban Hin

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Under O.18 R.19 (rules of Court 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended statement of claim discloses a reasonable cause of action on its face
  2. 2 Whether the claim is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious or an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether there is nexus/locus standi between parties and whether the correct parties were sued

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Sessions Court decision: the amended statement of claim prima facie disclosed at least one reasonable cause of action (misrepresentation and related claims) and raised serious factual issues (nexus, representations, reliance, unjust enrichment and potential lifting of the veil) that require full trial; striking out is only appropriate in plain and obvious cases and the lower court did not err in exercising its discretion to refuse summary dismissal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Respondent