Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ex‑parte leave

Legal area

Court

10 Mar 2025

1. ) TAN LIANG SWEE 2. ) TAN GIM LIN Suruhanjaya Sekuriti Malaysia

Citation

WA-25-123-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-123-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The ex‑parte leave was obtained without full and frank disclosure and without the mandatory affidavit verifying facts by A2 as required by O.53 r.3(2) RC 2012; a supplemental affidavit filed after leave was granted cannot cure that mandatory non‑compliance; additionally the applicants failed to exhaust the statutory review under s.364 CMSA, rendering the JR premature; therefore the ex‑parte leave is set aside and related reliefs granted.
15 Dec 2023

Tan Sri Dato' Kam Woon Wah 1. ) Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow 2. ) Hannah Kam Zhen Yi

Citation

WA-22NCvC-822-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-822-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court set aside the ex‑parte leave orders and dismissed the plaintiff's ex‑parte committal applications because the plaintiff failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants committed contempt: key evidence was inadmissible or not before the court, the plaintiff materially failed to disclose relevant facts in the ex‑parte applications, and there was no adequate proof of intent or real risk to the administration of justice from the alleged false address.
21 Jul 2023

1. ) Liputan Canggih Sdn Bhd 2. ) ASCOT HEIGHTS SDN. BHD. 3. ) LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. 4. ) EXTROGOLD SDN. BHD 5. ) REDZTIKAH SDN. BHD 6. ) EUREKA FOUNTAIN SDN BHD 7. ) TULUS KEMBANG SDN. BHD 1. ) K&A Management Sdn Bhd 2. ) Dato' Koh Fo

Citation

BA-22NCvC-534-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-534-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court set aside the ex‑parte leave and the fourth party notices because (a) there was no justification for ex‑parte relief where the proposed fourth parties had been in the proceedings for years, (b) the existence of KLHC Suit No. 215 was a material non‑disclosure relevant to the indemnity issue and should have been disclosed, and (c) permitting the fourth party proceedings risked abuse of process and duplication of litigation by breaching res judicata / issue estoppel; accordingly the setting aside applications were allowed and the fourth party notices discharged.

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) TAN LIANG SWEE 2. ) TAN GIM LIN Suruhanjaya Sekuriti Malaysia

Tan Sri Dato' Kam Woon Wah 1. ) Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow 2. ) Hannah Kam Zhen Yi

1. ) Liputan Canggih Sdn Bhd 2. ) ASCOT HEIGHTS SDN. BHD. 3. ) LBCN DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. 4. ) EXTROGOLD SDN. BHD 5. ) REDZTIKAH SDN. BHD 6. ) EUREKA FOUNTAIN SDN BHD 7. ) TULUS KEMBANG SDN. BHD 1. ) K&A Management Sdn Bhd 2. ) Dato' Koh Fo