Tay Keong Kok & 5 Ors v Eastmont Sdn Bhd (and Another Appeal) [2024] 7 AMR 245, CA

Company law – Directors – Liability – Appeal – Company owing debt to creditor ("plaintiff") wound up based on judgment in default obtained by another company with common directors and/or shareholders ("defendants") – High Court held defendants liable for fraudulent trading and conspiracy to injure plaintiff by winding up company – Whether High Court had competent jurisdiction to try plaintiff's claims – Whether elements of s 540 of the Companies Act 2016 fulfilled – Whether company's business carried on with intent to defraud creditors – Whether defendants personally liable to plaintiff – Whether defendants possessed knowledge of company's intent to defraud and knowingly participated in such act – Whether plaintiff was company's creditor – Whether claim in tort of conspiracy established – Whether plaintiff injured – Whether damages awarded by High Court reasonable – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Companies Act 2016, s 540

Company law – Fraudulent trading – Appeal – Company owing debt to creditor ("plaintiff") wound up based on judgment in default obtained by another company with common directors and/or shareholders ("defendants") – High Court held defendants liable for fraudulent trading and conspiracy to injure plaintiff by winding up company – Whether High Court had competent jurisdiction to try plaintiff's claims – Whether elements of s 540 of the Companies Act 2016 fulfilled – Whether company's business carried on with intent to defraud creditors – Whether defendants personally liable to plaintiff – Whether defendants possessed knowledge of company's intent to defraud and knowingly participated in such act – Whether plaintiff was company's creditor – Whether claim in tort of conspiracy established – Whether plaintiff injured – Whether damages awarded by High Court reasonable – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Companies Act 2016, s 540

Tort – Conspiracy – Damages – Appeal – Company owing debt to creditor ("plaintiff") wound up based on judgment in default obtained by another company with common directors and/or shareholders ("defendants") – High Court held defendants liable for fraudulent trading and conspiracy to injure plaintiff by winding up company – Whether High Court had competent jurisdiction to try plaintiff's claims – Whether elements of s 540 of the Companies Act 2016 fulfilled – Whether company's business carried on with intent to defraud creditors – Whether defendants personally liable to plaintiff – Whether defendants possessed knowledge of company's intent to defraud and knowingly participated in such act – Whether plaintiff was company's creditor – Whether claim in tort of conspiracy established – Whether plaintiff injured – Whether damages awarded by High Court reasonable – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Companies Act 2016, s 540

BM City Realty & Construction Sdn Bhd v Merger Insight Builders Sdn Bhd & Anor [2024] 7 AMR 310, HC

Civil procedure – Costs – Security for costs – Application for – Developer filed suit for impeachment of order granted in earlier suit commenced by contractors ("suit 1") – Contractors sought security for costs on basis of developer's nonpayment of costs relating to suit 1 and insolvency – Whether likelihood of non-payment of costs in instant suit by developer – Whether unless order ought to be attached to order for security for costs – Whether applications ought to be allowed

Heap Lee Chan Trading Company Sdn Bhd v Ng Chiang Chong [2024] 7 AMR 322, HC

Civil procedure – Injunctions – Fortuna injunction – Application to restrain former director from presenting winding-up petition – Previous proceedings initiated by former director raised same issues as stated in winding-up notice under s 465(1)(f) and (h) of the Companies Act 2016 – Whether proposed winding-up petition had chance of success – Whether amounted to abuse of court's process – Whether presentation of winding-up petition would cause irreparable damage to company – Whether there was any urgency or necessity to wind up company – Whether applications ought to be allowed – Companies Act 2016, s 465(1)(f), (h)

Sia Her Yam Realty Sdn Bhd v Strata Century Sdn Bhd & Anor [2024] 7 AMR 333, HC

Contract – Specific performance – Application for – Specific performance ordered against first defendant to construct sewerage piping on land – Failure to comply led to consequential orders and assessment of damages in lieu of order of specific performance ("consent order") – First defendant filed applications for order for specific performance to be made against it provided that plaintiff obtains necessary approval for construction of sewerage piping and stay of consent order – Whether such applications were misconceived in view of defendant's own non-compliance with order of specific performance – Whether court functus officio – Whether first defendant barred by doctrine of res judicata

SING v LING [2024] 7 AMR 342, HC

Family law – Children – Custody – Application by wife and cross-application by husband to vary consent order for custody, care and control of child for the third time – Previous two variations of custody order resulted in husband having final custody of child with access given to wife – Wife raised material changes in circumstances in application for variation of terms – Husband sought sole custody of child on ground of wife's incapacity – Whether consent order was subject to variation – Whether husband's cross-application maintainable – Whether material change of circumstances established to justify application and cross-application – Whether child should have been interviewed by court