Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Commercial insolvency

Legal area

Court

10 Jan 2025

PEMPETISYEN JN TEGUH ENERGY SDN BHD UMD ENERGY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-871-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-871-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because there was no stay of execution the pending appeal did not create a bona fide dispute as to the judgment debt; the fraud allegations had been litigated at trial and could not be re-opened in winding-up proceedings; and the respondent failed to pay the statutory notice within 21 days and failed to rebut the presumption of commercial insolvency, the court was entitled to make a winding-up order against the respondent.
9 Oct 2024

LUCKSOON METAL WORKS SDN BHD Propel Synergy Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-24NCC-345-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-345-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiff failed to establish a bona fide dispute over a judgment debt that was determined after a full trial and affirmed on appeal, failed to rebut the statutory presumption of inability to pay under section 466(1)(a) Companies Act 2016, and failed to prove present commercial solvency; accordingly the Fortuna injunction and interim injunction were refused and the defendant may proceed with enforcement including winding-up; costs RM5,000 awarded to the defendant.
8 Aug 2024

PEMPETISYEN CHENG YONG PIN ARBORLAND & CO. SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28NCC-953-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-953-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The respondent failed to demonstrate good reason or special circumstances to justify a stay; the statutory notice was proved served and non-payment raised the presumption of commercial insolvency which the respondent did not rebut; accordingly the winding-up petition must be allowed and the stay application dismissed.
4 Jul 2024

PEMPETISYEN PETRONAS LUBRICANTS MARKETING (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD RIGAZ SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-1104-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-1104-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Respondent's failure to pay the judgment sum after service of a statutory notice created a rebuttable presumption of commercial insolvency which the respondent failed to rebut; the statutory demand sum was properly calculated and any inexactness does not defeat the petition; accordingly the winding up petition must be allowed.
1 Jul 2024

PEMPETISYEN TEE CHONG AN INTAKE HOLDINGS SDN. BHD.

Citation

AA-28NCC-92-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-28NCC-92-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the respondent's evidence insufficient to establish duress or a conditional 'back-to-back' payment term, the respondent's solicitors' letter constituted an unequivocal admission of debt, the respondent failed to rebut the presumption of insolvency given its financial statements and failure to pay, and therefore the creditor established a prima facie case entitling the court to grant the winding-up petition under ss.464(1)(b), 465(1)(e) and 466(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2016.
31 May 2024

PEMPETISYEN MBSB BANK BERHAD ERAKEMAS SDN BHD

Citation

PA-28NCC-86-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-28NCC-86-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

MOE correspondence promising payment was unsubstantiated after nine months and insufficient to justify a stay; respondent was deemed unable to pay under section 466(1)(a) and failed to discharge the burden of proving solvency, therefore the winding up petition succeeds and the stay is dismissed.
9 May 2024

PEMPETISYEN D2D BIZHUB SDN BHD LKW PETROLEUM SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-736-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-736-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The petition was allowed because the judgment debt remained unsatisfied and could not be challenged in the winding-up forum pending reversal; the respondent failed to establish a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds and was commercially insolvent for failing to pay the judgment debt; the statutory notice was properly served at the respondent's registered address and/or business address and attracted the deeming provision, permitting the winding-up order.
10 May 2023

PEMPETISYEN RHB BANK BERHAD LEGION PUBLIC RELATIONS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-458-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-458-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found the consent judgment binding, the statutory notice was delivered, the claimed sum was sufficiently particularised, and the Respondent failed to rebut the presumption of commercial insolvency after service of the s466 notice; therefore the winding-up petition succeeds.
16 Feb 2023

PEMPETISYEN SYARIKAT PERUMAHAN NEGARA BERHAD KHAZANAH JAYA SDN. BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-651-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-651-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the relevant correspondence was admissible because it was not marked 'without prejudice' and the content constituted clear admissions; the respondent's denials were mere bare averments lacking particularized evidence to rebut the petition; non-payment of the statutory demand triggered a presumption of inability to pay which the respondent failed to rebut; accordingly the winding up petition succeeded and an order was granted.
28 Oct 2022

PEMPETISYEN Harjinder Singh Sandhu and Fatin Izyan Binti Mazlan for the Petitioner [Messrs Akberdin & Co.] Mohd Khairul Azam Bin Abdul Aziz for the Respondent [Messrs Azam Aziz & Co.]

Citation

WA-28NCC-239-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-239-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found no abuse of process, held the respondent failed to produce credible evidence of solvency or timely, reliable evidence that the Letter was falsified, and therefore failed to rebut the statutory presumption of commercial insolvency; consequently the winding up petition was allowed and Order in Terms granted for the specified prayers.