Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
BISHOPGATE CAPITAL LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
BOSTON ASIA CAPITAL LLC & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim for money remittance (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. dispute over remittance of funds (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. competing claims to the remitted money (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. validity of plaintiff's resolution (Para 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. dispute over purpose of remittance advises (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. court's findings on remittance purpose (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 7. court's acceptance of plaintiff's rationale (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. conclusion and order of the court (Para 41) |
Introduction
[1] The Plaintiff's claim is for the return of the sum of money remitted to the Plaintiff from a 3rd party deposited in the 1st Defendant's Bank account at the behest of the 2nd Defendant and now being wrongfully withheld by the Defendants.
[2] There is a chequered history to the proceeding in this case which arose as a result of a number of appeals to the Court of Appeal which resulted in remittance back from the Court of Appeal. The Court do not intend to elaborate the details here.
[3] Suffice to state that the present remittance to this Court from the Court of Appeal is to continue with the Tria
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
