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

2013 MarsdenLR 268

COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
CAPPING CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS – Appellant
Versus
AQUAWALK SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. dispute inception and arbitration context (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. overview of appeal (Para 2)
3. claims related to share ownership and rights (Para 10 , 12 , 15)
4. originating summons and legal grounds (Para 11)
5. parties' background and initial disputes (Para 13 , 14)
6. high court's orders and limitations on arbitration (Para 16 , 17)

[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court in which the learned judge held that the appellants are not entitled to initiate arbitration proceeding under cl 17.1 of the Shareholders Agreement dated 11 October 2002 entered between the 1st appellant and the 4th respondent (Shareholders Agreement). The decision stems from an application by the respondents in the form of an Originating Summons.

[2] On 7 March 2013 we heard the appeal and after due consideration by us, we allowed the appeal for reasons set out below.

Background Facts

[3] The 1st appellant and the 4th respondent on 31 October 2001 incorporated Aquawalk Sdn Bhd as the original shareholders of one share each with a view of implementing a joint venture investment plan of owning and operating an Aqua-Marine Discovery Centre in Kuala Lumpur.

[4] The

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top