COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GOH BAK MING – Appellant
Versus
YEOH ENG KONG & OTHER APPEALS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff claimed damages for conspiracy. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court's confirmation of the tort of conspiracy not being proven. (Para 10) |
| 3. defendants argued limitation and conspiracy. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
[1] The consolidated appeals emanate from the decision of the High Court which allowed the plaintiff's claim for damages for the tort of conspiracy against the defendants and for the return of advances given by the plaintiff to the 1st defendant. The cross-appeals by the plaintiff are against the inadequacy of damages awarded against the defendants.
[2] Appeal [1562] is the 1st defendant's appeal, whilst appeal [1563] is by the 7th to 9th defendants, appeal [1677] by the 6th and 14th defendants, appeal [1679] by the 5th defendant and appeal [1684] by the 11th defendant. We heard arguments on 5 September 2017 and 23 October 2017 and delivered our decision on 10 November 2017. We allowed all the appeals with costs and dismissed the plaintiff's cross-appeals. In this written judgment, the parties shall be referred to as they were in the Court below.
Summary Of The Plaintiff's Claim
[3] The 1st defendant was a director and shareholder of Liqua Plc as wel
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.