G BALAN GOVINDASAMY vs LEE MOI MOI & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 MarsdenLR 871

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
G BALAN GOVINDASAMY – Appellant
Versus
LEE MOI MOI & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Table of Content
1. facts of purchase from a fraudster. (Para 1 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 11)
2. breach of warranty of authority can occur when a solicitor misrepresents their client's authority. (Para 5)
3. determining breach of warranty and stakeholder duties. (Para 14 , 15 , 19)
4. negligence may result from failure to conduct proper verifications in property transactions. (Para 18 , 20)
5. breach of implied authority. (Para 23 , 25 , 28)
6. stakeholder duties may be breached by failing to follow contractual obligations regarding fund disbursement. (Para 34 , 57)
7. conclusion on liability adjustments. (Para 60)

Vernon Ong JCA:

Introduction

[1] The 1st to 4th plaintiffs purchased a piece of land from the purported owner. It later transpired that the purported owner was not the true owner of the land but a fraudster who impersonated the true owner. Consequently, the plaintiffs failed to acquire title to the land. The plaintiffs sued the solicitors (the 1st defendant) who were acting for the purported owner for damages for breach of warranty of authority to act and for breach of stakeholders duties. The plaintiffs also sued (i) their own solicitors (the 2nd defendant) for negligence, (ii) the Registrar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 MarsdenLR 871

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAG BALAN GOVINDASAMY – AppellantVersusLEE MOI MOI & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
G BALAN GOVINDASAMY – Appellant
Versus
LEE MOI MOI & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent