Genisys Integrated Engineers Pte Ltd v UEM Genisys Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) & 2 Ors [2023] 5 AMR 353, FC

Company law – Liquidators – Powers and duties – Liquidators admitted creditor's claim in proof of debt ("POD") subject to deductions of procurement fee and interest – Whether decision to accept or reject POD communicated – Applicability of Limitation Act 1953 to POD accepted and not formally rejected by liquidators – Whether liquidators admitted to sum claimed – Whether liquidators could unilaterally impose interest based on commercial decision and at a rate unilaterally decided by them in absence of contract to that effect – Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, rule 92 – Limitation Act 1953, ss 6(1), 29

Company law – Liquidators – Proof of debt ("POD") – Liquidators admitted creditor's claim in proof of debt ("POD") subject to deductions of procurement fee and interest – Whether decision to accept or reject POD communicated – Applicability of Limitation Act 1953 to POD accepted and not formally rejected by liquidators – Whether liquidators admitted to sum claimed – Whether liquidators could unilaterally impose interest based on commercial decision and at a rate unilaterally decided by them in absence of contract to that effect – Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, rule 92 – Limitation Act 1953, ss 6(1), 29

Abdul Malek Faisal bin Mohd Hyffny v Shaikh Markhzan Jalani & 2 Ors [2023] 5 AMR 370, CA

Company law – Meetings – Extraordinary general meeting ("EGM") – Declaration sought that resolution passed during EGM requisitioning for removal of director of company invalid and null and void – Articles of association of company provided time for EGM to be fixed with waiting period of 15 minutes for chairman of board to be present to chair EGM – EGM commenced 5 minutes after set time and ended 6 minutes later without waiting for 15 minutes for director/chairman to join – Whether resolution passed during EGM valid – Whether director/chairman denied statutory right to attend and chair meeting and participate in discussion – Whether EGM in violation of articles of association and statutory requirements – Whether violation curable – Companies Act 1965, s 181 – Companies Act 2016, ss 309, 311, 328, 329, 582

MPPL & Anor v CAS [2023] 5 AMR 395, CA

Family law – Children – Paternity – High Court ordered child to undergo deoxyribonucleic acid ("DNA") test to determine paternity – Presumption of legitimacy under s 112 of the Evidence Act 1950 raised – Whether respondent made out prima facie case that he had sexual relations with first appellant during conception period of child – Whether High Court empowered to order blood test on child to determine paternity via DNA test – Whether it was in best interest and welfare of child – Civil Law Act 1956, s 3(1) – Evidence Act 1950, s 112 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14A

Khor Yiap Seng (berniaga sebagai SD Pan Gourmet Resources) v Soo Geok Ki & 3 Ors (berniaga sebagai Pan Ya Resources) [2023] 5 AMR 408, HC

Contract – Agreements – Licence agreement – Illegality – Claims premised on illegality under the Contracts Act 1950 ("CA") and Franchise Act 1998 ("FA"), torts of deceit, conversion, unjust enrichment and conspiracy to injure plaintiff – Counterclaim for breach of licence agreement – Whether agreement was licence agreement or franchise agreement – Whether agreement valid and legal under the FA and CA – Whether tort of deceit, conversion, unjust enrichment and conspiracy proved – Whether counterclaim ought to be allowed – Contracts Act 1950, ss 2, 24, 66 – Franchise Act 1998, ss 4, 4(a), (b), (c), (e), 6, 6(1)

Contract – Agreements – Licence agreement – Misrepresentation – Actual franchise agreement mislabelled as licence agreement to evade illegality of franchise business being unregistered under Franchise Act 1998 ("FA") – False representation of franchise business with active knowledge of such illegality – Claim for invalidity on ground of illegality of agreement; and tort of deceit, conversion, unjust enrichment and conspiracy – Counterclaim for validity of licence agreement and breach by licensee with recovery of amounts – Whether franchise agreement mislabelled as franchise agreement and invalid being illegal under FA and Contracts Act 1950 – Whether tort of deceit, conversion, unjust enrichment and conspiracy proved – Whether counterclaim ought to be allowed – Contracts Act 1950, ss 2, 24, 66 – Franchise Act 1998, ss 4, 4(a), (b), (c), (e), 6, 6(1)

SKY v Peguam Negara [2023] 5 AMR 440, HC

Family law – Children – Legitimacy – Appeal against order for petitioner, born out of wedlock, to produce deoxyribonucleic acid ("DNA") report to prove she was legitimate child of her parents – Whether DNA report necessary in view of ss 32 and 33 of Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 read with s 35 of Evidence Act 1950 – Whether birth certificate conclusive proof of identity of biological parents – Whether decision contrary to public policy – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957, ss 13, 32, 33 – Evidence Act 1950, s 35 – Legitimacy Act 1961, ss 3, 4, 5

Yong Kein Sin & Anor v Perbadanan Pengurusan Springtide Residences [2023] 5 AMR 449, HC

Building and common property – Management corporation – By-laws passed by management corporation – Legal fee incurred in tribunal claim demanded pursuant to by-law passed during annual general meeting – Whether by-law and demand ultra vires Strata Management Act 2013 ("SMA") and/or the Strata Management (Maintenance and Management) Regulations 2015 ("Regulations") – Whether doctrine of res judicata and laches should be invoked – Whether contrary to s 106(1) of the SMA – Whether management corporation empowered to demand legal fee – Limitation Act 1953, s 32 – Strata Management Act 2013, ss 59, 59(1) 70(2), (5), 77(1), 106(1), 143 – Strata Management (Maintenance and Management) Regulations 2015