Back
2019 MarsdenLR 2373
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CECILY KEE LING LING – Appellant
Versus
VALIANTVIEW CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD; KUALA KENCANA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & ORS (A.... – Respondent
[Companies (Winding-Up) Petition No: 28NCC-603-07/2015]
Applicants must demonstrate a prima facie case to obtain leave against a company wound up under the Companies Act.
Headnote:The court analyzed Section 471 of the Companies Act 2016 confirming that leave must be obtained to commence actions against a wound-up company. The applicants, in this case, sought a declaration of their ownership of properties under sale and purchase agreements executed with a company that had been wound-up. The court determined that the applicants had a prima facie case, allowing them to proceed with the action despite the claims of the respondent. The application was granted with costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal requirements for leave to initiate action post-winding up. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
[9] There is no serious dispute between counsel as to the law relating to the requirements for leave of Court in order to commence or maintain a suit against a company that has been wound up. It suffices therefore for me to summarise the applicable principles.
[10] Section 471 of the Companies Act 2016 provides that leave must first be obtained where a claimant seeks to initiate or to proceed with an action against a company in respect of which an order for winding up has been granted.
[11] An applicant seeking leave under s 471 must satisfy the Court that:
(a) the applicant's claim cannot be adequately dealt with by the winding up Court. Where the claim is for specific performance or is otherwise not a monetary claim, the claim would not be one that could be dealt with in the liquidation action; and
(b) the applicant has a prima facie case against the company. [ Mesuntung Property Sdn Bhd v. Kimlin Housing Development Sdn Bhd , ].
The Application Of The Principles To The Facts
