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

2017 MarsdenLR 1060

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
DATO PREM KRISHNA SAHGAL – Appellant
Versus
MUNIANDY NADASAN & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: 02(f)-53-08-2016(W)]



Section 304(1) of the Companies Act 1965 holds individuals personally liable if business is conducted with the intent to defraud creditors.

Headnote:Section 304 of the Companies Act 1965 addresses fraudulent trading, allowing courts to hold directors personally liable for debts if company business is conducted with intent to defraud creditors. The facts outlined establish that employees were creditors due to unpaid wages and statutory contributions. The court found intent to defraud as the appellant continued operations despite knowing there was no prospect of payment to employees. The final outcome affirmed the lower court's decisions declaring the appellant personally liable for the debts owed to the employees.

Table of Content
1. appeal against dismissal in lower courts concerning fraudulent trading. (Para 1)

[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal dated 30 December 2015 which dismissed the appellant's appeal with costs. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 21 August 2016 on the following question of law:

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 Back to top