Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

FRANCIS HO SEE SIN 1. ) TOH OOI PENG 2. ) HO SZE KEEN 3. ) HO WYE LUN

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-55-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

WA-12BNCvC-55-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Appellant's repeated promises and the circumstances surrounding the RM200,000 cheque to the company he controlled constituted an enforceable promise of indemnity such that judgment for RM200,000 with interest was warranted; conversely the Australia Claim lacked a legal basis in Malaysia because the alleged cause of action arose in Australia, there was no proven liability of the Appellant's son in Malaysia nor consideration to bind the father, therefore that part of the Sessions Court judgment was set aside.

20 Oct 2019

1. PANNIR SELVAM A/L SINNAIYAH (NO. K/P: 691017-05-5127) 2. SANTHI A/P PERUMAL (NO. K/P: 720514-01-5628) 1. TAN CHIA FOO (NO. K/P: 810827-01-6313) 2. NG CHIN WEI (NO. K/P: 951030-01-5697) 3. PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK JOHOR 4. KERAJAAN NEGERI JOHOR

Citation: JA-22NCVC-273-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court: High Court
Case number: JA-22NCVC-273-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court accepted Plaintiffs' evidence that the sale agreements were sham devices to secure loans: contemporaneous WhatsApp messages and bank transactions, the striking pattern of repeated low-value SPAs and rescissions, and unusual contractual terms rendered the Agreement a façade. Parol evidence rule did not exclude the evidence since the validity of the transaction was in issue. The First Defendant's title was defeated under NLC s340 and the Second Defendant failed to prove he was a bona fide purchaser for value; accordingly transfers were set aside and Plaintiffs' principal reliefs grant…