Claims deemed unmaintainable if plaintiffs were aware of settlement terms, resulting in orders for claims to be struck out due to their scandalous nature.

JUDGMENT

George Varughese JC:

Introduction

[1] This is an omnibus grounds of judgment in respect of the 4 applications which were heard together.

[2] The 4 applications for determination are, as follows:

(i) Enclosure 16 - The 8th defendant's Notice of Application dated 5 December 2019, to strike out the Amended Statement of Claim pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(b) and (d), Rules of 2012 ( ROC 2012") and/or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court;

(ii) Enclosure 18 - the 9th defendant's Notice of Application dated 5 December 2019, to strike out the Amended Statement of Claim pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(b) and (d), ROC 2012 and/or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court;

(iii) Enclosure 21- the 1st till 7th defendants' Notice of Application dated 18 December 2019, to strike out the Amended Writ and the Amended Statement of Claim pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a) and/or (b) and/or (c) and/or (d), ROC 2012 and/or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court; and

(iv) Enclosure 32 - the plaintiffs' Notice of Application dated 14 February 2020, for discovery of documents under O 24 rr 3 and 7 ROC 2012.

[3] The 3 applications for striking out in encls 16, 18 and 21 will be discussed and determined first, followed by encl 32.

A. Enclosures 16, 18 And 21

Background Facts

[4] The following background facts are distilled from the affidavits and submissions filed by the parties herein.

[5] The 1st plaintiff is a shareholder and director of the 2nd plaintiff ("Company"), who had guaranteed the Company's borrowings as described hereinafter.

[6] The Company borrowed monies, initially, from Hong Leong Finance Berhad ("Bank").

[7] The 9th defendant ("Danaharta") is a company set up under the Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad Act 1998 ("Danaharta Act 1998") and is wholly-owned by the Minister of Finance, Incorporated.

[8] On or about 27 September 1999, pursuant to s 14, Danaharta Act 1998, Danaharta had acquired, inter alia, the rights and interest of the Bank in respect of the Term Loan of RM 12 million granted by the Bank to the Company ("Term Loan").

[9] Danaharta also acquired the security for the Term Loan, which included legal charges ("Legal Charges") created by the Company over its lands known as Lot Nos 1244, 3670 and 1249, Mukim 14, District of Seberang Perai Tengah, Pulau Pinang ("Lands"), and the Guarantee and Indemnity dated 2 April 1997 ("GAI") executed by the 1st plaintiff in favour of the Bank.

[10] As a result of the Company's default in the repayment of the Term Loan, Danaharta took action to realise the Legal Charges and instituted legal action against both the Company and the 1st plaintiff for the recovery of the debts due and owing under the Term Loan.

[11] Multiple suits were filed by Danaharta and the plaintiffs in respect of the Term Loan and the GAI.

[12] Messrs Shook, Lin & Bok, the 8th defendant ("Messrs. SLB") acted as the solicitors for Danaharta in respect of the following matters:

(i) Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-246-1998 (Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad v. Tham Soon Seong) ("Suit 246");

(ii) Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-712-2005 (Perumahan Wira Seberang Sdn Bhd v. CMC Premier Planner Sdn Bhd and 5 Others) ("Suit 712");

(iii) Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-291-2006 (Perumahan Wira Seberang Sdn Bhd v. CMC Premier Planner Sdn Bhd and 5 Others) ("Suit 291");

(iv) Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-537-2006 (Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad v. Perumahan Wira Seberang Sdn Bhd) ("Suit 537");

(v) Penang High Court Bankruptcy No 29-948-2008 (Ex parte: Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad; Re: Tham Soon Seong) ("Bankruptcy Action"); and

(vi) Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-355-2008 (Tham Soon Seong v. Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad) ("Suit 355").

(Collectively referred to as "the said Matters").

[13] In all the said Matters, the 1st plaintiff and the Company were represented by Messrs. Ismail, Khoo & Associates ("Messrs. IKA") till December 2010. Messrs. IKA are also the plaintiffs' solicitors in the pres