COURT OF APPEAL , PUTRAJAYA
HAIDAKOTA (M) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
TAN TIAM CHAI & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Gopal Sri Ram JCA delivering JUDGMENT:
[1] This is the judgment of the court.
[2] An order directing security for costs is a discretionary order. The general principle upon which this court acts in appeals against such orders is that it will not interfere unless it is demonstrated that the primary judge had taken into account irrelevant considerations or failed to take into account relevant considerations or asked himself or herself the wrong question or misdirected himself or herself in law. The initial jurisdiction of this court is therefore one of review only. Once reasons for the exercise of discretion are given, this court is most reluctant to interfere with the decision of the judge at first instance. But this is a case where no reason has been given, so the matter is at large before us.
[3] The starting point is s. 351 of the Companies Act 1965 ("the Act") which confers a very wide discretion on the High court to order a company to provide security for costs in an action brought by it or indeed against it. But the discretion is not untrammeled. Nor is it unprincipled. For there are settled guidelines upon which the discretion falls to be exercised. First, the applica
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.