Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Fraud particulars

Legal area

Court

1 Sept 2021

PA-22NCVC-2-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

PA-22NCVC-2-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCVC-2-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The claim against the 3rd and 4th defendants disclosed no reasonable cause of action because they were not parties to the sub‑tenancy (no privity) and the plaintiff failed to plead specific particulars of fraud; issues as to validity of tenancy and probate are subject of ongoing Suit 236 and cannot be resolved in this summary process; therefore the claim against these defendants is obviously unsustainable and was struck out.
9 Sept 2020

KENNETH CHOONG YEW PHING 1. ) YAP BENG LEE 2. ) YAP HOCK BENG 3. ) YAP BENG LEE SDN BHD 4. ) KHOR TOONG YEE 5. ) CHENG HENG JEM 6. ) LION TIN SDN BHD 7. ) WELL HAI SHENG SDN BHD

Citation

wa-23ncvc-46-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

wa-23ncvc-46-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application was allowed and the SOC struck out against the 4th, 5th and 6th defendants because the pleaded causes of action predominantly concern wrongs to JVCo (the proper plaintiff), the Applicants are outsiders to the joint venture and owed no pleaded fiduciary duties to P, the pleadings failed to particularise fraud, conspiracy and dishonest assistance, and there was no basis pleaded to pierce the corporate veil to render D4 and D5 personally liable.