UNIVERSAL BOWLING SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 11756-16-P) SINEO MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 350727-K) 2. MCRM SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 815468-V) 3. FND EMPIRE SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 1065559-K)

UNIVERSAL BOWLING SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 11756-16-P) SINEO MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 350727-K) 2. MCRM SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 815468-V) 3. FND EMPIRE SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO. 1065559-K)

The court found the plaintiff acquired legal and beneficial ownership of the equipment upon immediate purchase from the auction buyer on 30.12.2018, so subsequent transfers by D1 could not pass title; allegations that D2 and D3 are bona fide purchasers raise factual issues (possible nexus, lack of documentary evidence, timing of viewings) that cannot be resolved on strike out, therefore the applications to strike out were dismissed and the matter must proceed to full trial.

Citation
JA-22NCVC-49-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Universal Bowling Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant 1: Sineo Management Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant 2: MCRM Sdn. Bhd.; Defendant 3: FND Empire Sdn. Bhd.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Case Number
JA-22NCVC-49-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit Tort of Conversion / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out (o.18 R 19)
Outcome
Applications by Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 to strike out the writ and statement of claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Conversion, Bona Fide Purchaser, Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet, Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19, Distress and Public Auction
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Property Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law Conversion Bona Fide Purchaser Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Universal Bowling Sdn. Bhd.

Plaintiff

Sineo Management Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant 1

MCRM Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant 2

FND Empire Sdn. Bhd.

Defendant 3

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit Tort of Conversion / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out (o.18 R 19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff acquired legal and beneficial ownership of the equipment at auction
  2. 2 Whether defendants 2 and 3 are bona fide purchasers for value without notice
  3. 3 Whether defendants committed tort of conversion

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff acquired legal and beneficial ownership of the equipment upon immediate purchase from the auction buyer on 30.12.2018, so subsequent transfers by D1 could not pass title; allegations that D2 and D3 are bona fide purchasers raise factual issues (possible nexus, lack of documentary evidence, timing of viewings) that cannot be resolved on strike out, therefore the applications to strike out were dismissed and the matter must proceed to full trial.

Court Disposition

Applications by Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 to strike out the writ and statement of claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Application by Defendant 2 to strike out dismissed with costs of RM2,000 payable by Defendant 2 subject to allocatur fees
  • Application by Defendant 3 to strike out dismissed with costs of RM1,000 payable by Defendant 3 subject to allocatur fees