SEE CHOO @ SEE GUAT KIOK vs JB SECURITIES SDN BHD - 2011 MarsdenLR 5518 ; 2011 MarsdenLR 1

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 MarsdenLR 5518 ; 2011 MarsdenLR 1

GUNALAN MUNIANDY
SEE CHOO @ SEE GUAT KIOK – Appellant
Versus
JB SECURITIES SDN BHD – Respondent

Table of Content
1. establishment of plaintiff's claim and defendant's background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. limitation period and fraudulent claims. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. impact of prior legal suit on current claims. (Para 15 , 16)
4. burden of proof in fraud allegations. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
5. conclusion on proof of fraud and outcome of case. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)

JUDGMENT

GUNALAN A/L MUNIANDY, JC:

(1) The plaintiff (P)s cause of action, which arises from a contractual relationship with the defendant (D) involving share trading, is premised on fraud as particularised in the statement of claim. The alleged fraud by D revolved around the manner in which Ps share trading accounts were operated by D. The claim was broken down into various heads, each particularised in the form of individual trading names for shares of companies listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE). The various heads refer to the trading counters as set out in the statement of claim (SOC).

Summary of Facts (Agreed)

(2) (1) The plaintiff was a client of the defendant. The defendant is a stock broking company, whose main tr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 MarsdenLR 5518 ; 2011 MarsdenLR 1

GUNALAN MUNIANDYSEE CHOO @ SEE GUAT KIOK – AppellantVersusJB SECURITIES SDN BHD – Respondent

Cases Referred (4)

GUNALAN MUNIANDY
SEE CHOO @ SEE GUAT KIOK – Appellant
Versus
JB SECURITIES SDN BHD – Respondent