WONG KAR JUAT & ANOR vs S7 AUTO PARTS [M] SDN BHD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 909

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
WONG KAR JUAT & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
S7 AUTO PARTS [M] SDN BHD – Respondent

Table of Content
1. introduction and statement of facts regarding fiduciary duties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. appellants' defense against breaches succeeded. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. judgment on burden of proof regarding claims. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. critical assessment of evidence regarding missing funds. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. issues concerning sales transactions and evidence production. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
6. investigation and evidence of missing engines. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
7. critical evaluation of missing utilized evidence. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
8. conclusion emphasizing lack of evidence for claims. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48)

Idrus Harun JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appeal in the present instance had been brought by the appellants in light of the High Court's decision in allowing the respondent's claim against the appellants. We heard both counsel for the appellants and the respondent and accordingly at the conclusion of the arguments, allowed the appeal.

The Suit

[2] Before we embark upon a consideration of the merits of, and the reasons for allowing the appeal, it would be desirable to lay down some of the ma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 909

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAWONG KAR JUAT & ANOR – AppellantVersusS7 AUTO PARTS [M] SDN BHD – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
WONG KAR JUAT & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
S7 AUTO PARTS [M] SDN BHD – Respondent