Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Patel v mirza proportionality test

Legal area

Court

24 May 2023

LAU KOK LOON @ LAU SAY SIOK LOW YEE MENG

Citation

WA-22NCC-530-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-530-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found on the balance of probabilities that a resulting trust existed in favour of the Plaintiff over all 238,096 shares because the 1995 transfer was not intended as a gift and was supported by contemporaneous evidence (statutory declarations, blank transfer forms, conduct); the illegality defence failed because creditors were not deceived to their prejudice, the bankruptcy orders were annulled and applying the Patel v Mirza considerations (and related authorities) denial of relief would be disproportionate; equitable defences of laches and acquiescence were rejected; accordingly Plaint…
6 May 2021

1. TAY ENG TIAN 2. CHONG LING YOON KOH KOH KIAN

Citation

JB-22NCVC-24-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-22NCVC-24-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The strike out application was dismissed because the claim was not obviously unsustainable on its face; allegations of illegal money lending did not automatically render the sale and purchase claims incapable of relief and the illegality defence required fuller scrutiny under the public interest/proportionality approach (Patel v Mirza). The defendant could not be permitted to both rely on illegality and retain the disputed property (approbate and reprobate) but that issue required trial determination, not summary striking out.