Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 517 companies act 2016

Legal area

Court

24 Oct 2024

MOHAMMAD ANSAR BIN ABDUL RASHID Chong Chuan Long [PELIKUIDASI NAUTICAL WEALTH SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) (NO SYARIKAT.: 201101006650 (934787-M)] PENCELAH HAI MING DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28PW-47-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-47-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court dismissed the application to set aside the Validation Order and dismissed the related prayers; because the primary relief was refused, the earlier refusal to grant a stay became academic and no stay was required. Costs were ordered against the Applicant to both the Respondent and the Intervener.
11 Oct 2022

CLASSIC MARITIME INC LION DIVERSIFIED HOLDINGS BERHAD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) PENCELAH Benapro Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The 26.8.2021 court order approving the sale was validly obtained and the liquidator acted within statutory powers, disclosed the relationship, and procured a reasonable arm's-length price via public tender; the applicant failed to prove fraud, lack of bona fides or irrationality; therefore the Section 517 challenge and application to set aside the order fail and must be dismissed.
11 Oct 2022

Yap Yeow Han and Abd Azim bin Abd Razak for the Applicant [Messrs Rahmat Lim & Partners] 1. ) Emily Wong and H’ng Yen Jun for the 1 st Respondent [Messrs Dennis Nik & Wong] 2. ) Saheran Suhendran and Rodney Gan for the 2nd Respondent [Messr

Citation

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Motion dismissed because the prior 26.8.2021 court order approving the sale was regular and conclusive, the applicant failed to prove illegality, lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, fraud or bad faith by the liquidator, the tender process and disclosures were adequate and the sale was not shown to be at undervalue; Section 517 was inapplicable as the decision had been judicially approved and injunctive relief to undo a regular court-approved sale would be unjust and an abuse of process.
11 Oct 2022

Yap Yeow Han and Abd Azim bin Abd Razak for the Applicant [Messrs Rahmat Lim & Partners] 1. ) Saheran Suhendran and Rodney Gan for the 2nd Respondent [Messrs Sanjay Mohan] 2. ) Emily Wong and H’ng Yen Jun for the 1 st Respondent [Messrs Den

Citation

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-333-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Motion was dismissed: the 26.8.2021 court order approving the sale is valid; the liquidator conducted a public tender, disclosed related‑party ties, acted reasonably under Companies Act powers, the sale was not shown to be undervalue on the balance of probabilities, section 517 was inapplicable given the prior court sanction, and granting the relief would be an abuse of process; costs awarded to respondents.
2 Apr 2021

Goik Kenwayne and Foong Kar Yee for the Applicants [Messrs Dennis Nik & Wong] K.F Ee and Marcus Chong for the Liquidator Respondent [Messrs K.F Ee & Co] PENCELAH Peter Douglas Ling and Lovery Leong for the Intervener [Messrs Peter Ling & Co

Citation

POST WINDING UP NO. WA-28PW-541-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

POST WINDING UP NO. WA-28PW-541-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

No sufficient cause was shown to remove the liquidator; evidence established the liquidator conducted a forensic investigation and acted within his statutory powers and bona fide discretion, the appointments of solicitors and forensic accountant were proper, Suit 472 was a reasonable exercise of his duties, failure to call meetings or notify creditors did not amount to removable misconduct, and the applicant failed to obtain leave to sue the liquidator; application dismissed with costs.
31 Jul 2019

PEMPETISYEN ANN YAK SIONG HARDWARE SDN. BHD. STRAIGHT ENGINEERING SDN BHD

Citation

BA-28NCC-273-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-28NCC-273-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Liquidator's rejection of the POD was reasonable and justified because the applicant failed to provide verifiable and sufficient evidence of a company loan (no board resolution, absence from company records, bank statement discrepancies, unstamped agreement and uncooperative witness); the delay beyond 28 days was justified by the complexity of investigation and requests for further evidence, and Rule 98 does not automatically invalidate a rejection after 28 days where inquiry is ongoing; accordingly the court will not interfere absent unreasonableness.

Malaysia Case Law

MOHAMMAD ANSAR BIN ABDUL RASHID Chong Chuan Long [PELIKUIDASI NAUTICAL WEALTH SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) (NO SYARIKAT.: 201101006650 (934787-M)] PENCELAH HAI MING DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

CLASSIC MARITIME INC LION DIVERSIFIED HOLDINGS BERHAD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) PENCELAH Benapro Sdn. Bhd.

Yap Yeow Han and Abd Azim bin Abd Razak for the Applicant [Messrs Rahmat Lim & Partners] 1. ) Emily Wong and H’ng Yen Jun for the 1 st Respondent [Messrs Dennis Nik & Wong] 2. ) Saheran Suhendran and Rodney Gan for the 2nd Respondent [Messr

Yap Yeow Han and Abd Azim bin Abd Razak for the Applicant [Messrs Rahmat Lim & Partners] 1. ) Saheran Suhendran and Rodney Gan for the 2nd Respondent [Messrs Sanjay Mohan] 2. ) Emily Wong and H’ng Yen Jun for the 1 st Respondent [Messrs Den

Goik Kenwayne and Foong Kar Yee for the Applicants [Messrs Dennis Nik & Wong] K.F Ee and Marcus Chong for the Liquidator Respondent [Messrs K.F Ee & Co] PENCELAH Peter Douglas Ling and Lovery Leong for the Intervener [Messrs Peter Ling & Co

PEMPETISYEN ANN YAK SIONG HARDWARE SDN. BHD. STRAIGHT ENGINEERING SDN BHD