Abdul Malik Ishak J:-

Question Of Law For Determination

[1] I was confronted with a summons in chambers in encl. 56 filed by the plaintiff, on the one part, and the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th defendants, on the other part, for an order pursuant to O. 14A and/or O. 33 r. 2 of the Rules of the High 1980 ("RHC") that the question of law set out in Schedule "A" be determined accordingly. The 2nd defendant was not involved in this legal manoeuvring since it was wound up on 28 February 1996. In Schedule "A", the question of law was phrased and framed in this way:

[2] Can the plaintiff still maintain and continue with this action on the existing statement of claim filed on 20 January 1988 after the execution of the settlement agreement dated 18 November 1993 and the transfer of the 6,000,000 ordinary shares in Sama World Asia Sdn Bhd to the plaintiff?

[3] In the event the issue as phrased and framed was answered in the negative, this would determine the action in favour of the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th defendants.

[4] But, in the event the issue as phrased and framed was answered in the affirmative, the action would proceed accordingly on the other issues arising.

[5] Ours is an adversarial s