Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
KOH JUI HIONG & ORS – Appellant
Versus
KI TAK SANG & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on appeal and standing issues (Para 2 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. summary of trial court findings (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. court observations on facts and law (Para 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 5. standing in a s 181 petition. (Para 14) |
| 6. ratio decidendi regarding standing and damages (Para 15 , 18) |
| 7. relief under section 181 ca. (Para 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 8. differentiating between types of actions permissible under company law. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 9. compensatory nature of awards under s 181 ca. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 10. judicial discretion and authority in awarding damages. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 11. discretionary powers of the court in awarding damages (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 12. implications of compensation awards within legal frameworks. (Para 33) |
| 13. cross-jurisdictional perspectives on derivative actions and compensation. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
[1] These two related appeals arose from the s 181 (of the Companies Act 1965 ("CA")) petition of petitioners 1-8 (hereinafter referred to as petitioners, as enumerated in the petition) who, collectively held, either directly or indirectly, a total of 867,500 shares or 21.6875% of the equity of CIN Holdings Sdn Bhd (9th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
