Back
2024 MarsdenLR 2791
HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
NUR SHAHRINA NOR ARIFFIN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN INSOLVENSI MALAYSIA – Respondent
[Judicial Review Application No: BA-25-60-09/2023]
Judicial review is inappropriate when alternative remedies exist under the Insolvency Act, emphasizing the need to utilize the appeal process.
Headnote:(A) Insolvency Act 1967 – Sections 2, 74, 86, and 88 – Judicial review application – Applicants sought leave to commence judicial review against the respondent's decision rejecting their offer related to their bankrupt father's estate – The court found judicial review inappropriate as alternative remedies exist under the Insolvency Act. (Paras 10, 14, 25)
(B) Judicial Review – The court emphasized that judicial review is not available where there is an alternative remedy by way of appeal, unless exceptional circumstances are shown. (Paras 23, 24)
Facts of the case: The applicants sought to challenge the respondent's rejection of their offer to settle their father's debt from the sale of a portion of inherited property, citing the decision made on 10 July 2023. (Paras 2, 10)
Findings of Court: The court concluded that the applicants should pursue remedies available under the Insolvency Act rather than judicial review. (Paras 25)
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicants could seek judicial review given the existence of alternative remedies under the Insolvency Act. (Paras 14, 25)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that judicial review is not the appropriate procedure when alternative remedies exist, reaffirming that applicants must utilize the appeal process under the Insolvency Act. (Paras 25)
Result: Application for leave to commence judicial review dismissed.
JUDGMENT
[1] This is an application filed by Nur Sharina binti Nor Ariffin and Nor Shahrilikmal bin Nor Ariffin ("the applicants") on 7 September 2023 seeking leave to commence judicial review proceedings pursuant to O 53 r 3(1) of the Rules of 2012 ("ROC 2012").
Reliefs Sought
[2] In this application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings, the applicants have sought the following reliefs as reproduced form encl 1:
"(1) satu certiorari untuk membatalkan keputusan Responden terkandung di dalam suratnya bertarikh 10 Julai 2023 (ruj No BP000598/2011 (Sek. Aset)) yang enggan menerima jumlah sebanyak RM43,750.00 bagi estet Nor Ariffin Bin M Said ("Si Bankrap") yang merupakan satu perlapan (%) bahagian hasil jualan dari satu perjanjian jual beli bertarikh 17 Oktober 2022 berkenaan dengan satu hartanah yang dipegang di bawah hakmilik No HSM 16819, PT 16260, Tempat Taman Sri Andalas (Ladang Tremelbye), Mukim Klang, Daerah Klang, Negeri Selangor yang dimasuki antara Nor Adzlinah Binti M Said, Nor Abidin Bin Mohd Said, Nor Adzman Bin Said, Nor Alezah Binti Md Said, Nor Ameyaton Binti M Said, Si Bankrap, Nor Kamarulzaman Bin M Said, dan Norafidah Binti Mohd Said sebagai penjual-penjual dan Pemohon-pemohon sebagai pembeli- pembeli ("Perjanjian tersebut").
(2) satu deklarasi bahawa Perjanjian tersebut adalah sah dan boleh dikuatkuasakan di sisi undang-undang;
(3) satu perintah bahawa Responden hendaklah menerima dan memasukkan ke dalam akaun estet Si Bankrap jumlah sebanyak RM43,750.00 daripada Pemohon-pemohon atau Maybank Islamic Berhad atau institut kewangan lain yang memberi pinjaman kepada Pemohon-pemohon berkenaan dengan Perjanjian tersebut;
(4) kos; dan
(5) relief-relief selanjutnya dan/atau selainnya sebagaimana yang dianggap adil dan suai manfaat oleh mahkamah yang mulia ini."
Factual Background
[3] The facts of this application are derived from the documents filed by parties.
[4] On 17 October 2022, the applicants entered into a sale and purchase agreement ("the agreement") relating to 1/8th of an undivided portion of land owned each by their father, uncles and aunts ("the proprietors") who inherited the land from the applicants' grandparents, held under title No HSM 16819, PT 16260, Tempat Taman Sri Andalas (Ladang Tremelbye), Mukim Klang, Daerah Klang, Negeri Selangor.
[5] Maybank Islamic Berhad ("the financial institute") agreed to finance the purchase of the property. The applicants received an offer letter on 4 August 2022 from the financial institute.
[6] A bankruptcy search on the proprietors was conducted by the financial institute on 7 December 2022. The results of the bankruptcy search revealed that the Shah Alam High Court had adjudged their father bankrupt on 11 January 2011.
[7] On 9 December 2022, the applicants' solicitors inquired the respondent about the outstanding debt owed by their father and were informed that the amount of debt still owing was RM127,052.45. On the same day, the Klang Land District Office registered the applicants as the owners of 1/2 of the undivided portion of the property and a charge was registered in favour of the financial institute for the facility issued on the said property.
[8] The applicants then contacted their father's creditor, Public Islamic Bank Berhad to reduce the amount of debt and to settle the debt in full, in order to release their father from bankruptcy status. The creditor vide a letter dated 2 May 2023 agreed to reduce the amount of debt owed to RM115,000.00 provided that such amount is fully settled by 23 June 2023.
[9] The applicants' solicitor wrote to the respondent on 27 May 2023 and 14 June 2023 and made an offer on behalf of the applicants' father to pay RM43,750.00 being the proceed of the sale of the 1/8th portion in the agreement for their father's asset ("the offer").
[10] The respondent on 10 July 2023 rejected the offer for the following reasons:
(i) The agreement was entered within the prohibited time as prescribed in subsection 52(1) of the I
