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

2014 MarsdenLR 1151

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LAMA TILE (TIMUR) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
LIM MENG KWANG & ANOR – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Brian Cumming,YJ Yap ,Respondent Advocate: Elzubaiyah Meriam Nor Mohd Yusoff

Table of Content
1. background on fraudulent trading claim (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 11)
2. court's analysis of evidence and findings (Para 3 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 23 , 24 , 27)
3. appellant's arguments against high court findings (Para 14 , 21)
4. arguments presented by the appellant during the appeal. (Para 20)
5. ratio decidendi on s 304 application requirements (Para 22 , 25 , 26)

[1] In this appeal, the appellant was the plaintiff in the High Court. The appellant filed a writ action against the respondents, as defendants, seeking remedies under s 304(1) of the Companies Act 1965 ("the Act"). The High Court dismissed the claim.

[2] The respondents were common Directors and shareholders of two companies, namely, LMK Edaran Sdn Bhd and SLMK Edaran Sdn Bhd (hereafter, "LMK Edaran" and "SLMK Edaran"). In essence, the claim was grounded on fraudulent trading by LMK Edaran and its Directors/shareholders (the respondents), by which the plaintiff, as the creditor of LMK Edaran, was defrauded in the sense that, after judgment had been obtained against LMK Edaran, the business of LMK Edaran was transferred to SMLK Edaran, leaving SMK Edaran dormant so as to defeat the rights of the appellant as th

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