Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA PENANG
CHUA HENG HONG & ORS – Appellant
Versus
S LITE ELECTRICAL AND ENGINEERING SDN BHD & ANOR AND ANOTHER CASE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs initiated breach of rsa. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claims for breach against slite concerning costs. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. court's finding on conditional payments under ssa. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. directors cannot claim damages for losses incurred by the company. (Para 70 , 71 , 72 , 73) |
Introduction
[1] The Plaintiffs sue the Defendants for breach of cl 9 of a share sale agreement dated 13 October 2020 ("SSA"). The Defendants in turn counterclaim for a declaration that cl 9 of the SSA is void. After a full trial, I dismiss the Plaintiffs' claim and allow the Defendants' counterclaim. Here are the grounds of my judgment.
Background Facts
[2] The 1st Plaintiff ("P1") and the 2nd Plaintiff ("P2") are the directors of the 3rd Plaintiff ("Hong Poh"). P1 is the sole shareholder of Hong Poh. Both P1 and P2 were former shareholders of the 1st Defendant ("SLite"). The 2nd Defendant ("D2") is the director and shareholder of S Lite.
[3] On 13 October 2020, P1 and P2 entered into the SSA to sell their 50% shareholding in S Lite to D2 for a consideration of RM120,000.00. The SSA was entered into between P1 and P2 (as vendors) and D2 (as purchase
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
