SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 MarsdenLR 2192

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
LIN WEN-CHIH & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MYCOM BERHAD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Ram Karpal,Karpal Singh ,Respondent Advocate: Porres Royan,Prem Ramachandran

Table of Content
1. breach of share sale agreement (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. identifying issues regarding agreement understanding (Para 6 , 8 , 12)
3. evaluation of credibility of evidence (Para 10 , 11 , 20)
4. doctrine of non est factum (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
5. burden of proof and conclusion against plaintiffs (Para 30 , 34 , 37)
Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JC:

[1] The Plaintiffs were the registered and beneficial shareholders of 18,862,000 of the shares of a company known as Veramax Sdn. Bhd ("Veramax"). The Defendant is a public listed company. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant entered into a written agreement dated 1 March 1996 ("the Share Sale Agreement") whereby the Plaintiffs agreed to sell and the Defendant agreed to buy 12,750,000 shares of Veramax for a consideration of RM55 million. In lieu of the RM55 million purchase consideration a list of shares were to be transferred to the Plaintiffs and the purchase price shall be deemed to be fully paid.

[2] The Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant was in breach of the Share Sale Agreement as the Defendant failed to make the payment of RM55 million. The consideration shares according to the Plaintiffs were not delivered and therefore RM55 mi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top