LIM CHIEW vs LEE CHAO YONG & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 2981

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LIM CHIEW – Appellant
Versus
LEE CHAO YONG & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:RK Sharma,Amrit Pal Singh ,Respondent Advocate: Mark Ho,M/s Chellam Wong

Table of Content
1. introduction of appeals and initial findings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. background facts relating to the winding-up process. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. arguments presented by the appellants and respondents. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
4. court observations regarding laches and delay. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
5. discussion on res judicata and abuse of process. (Para 34)

[1] There are two appeals before us which are as follows:

(a) Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCC)-2038-11- 2016 ("Appeal 2038" by the appellant Lim Chiew); and

(b) Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCC)-2054-11- 2016 ("Appeal 2054" by the appellant Siteman Construction Sdn Bhd).

[2] These two appeals are against the decision of the learned High Court Judge ("Judge") delivered on 11 October 2016 allowing Lee Chao Yong's application under s 279 of the repealed Companies Act 1965 ("RCA"), vide Notice of Motion dated 11 July 2016 ("Motion 97"), to reverse and/or modify the decision of the Liquidator of the appellant ("Siteman") in admitting Lim Chiew's proof of debt ("POD") dated 21 June 2010 for the total sum of RM6,893,838.23.

[3] The learned judge's decision/order in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 2981

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYALIM CHIEW – AppellantVersusLEE CHAO YONG & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LIM CHIEW – Appellant
Versus
LEE CHAO YONG & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent