Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GOO SING KAR – Appellant
Versus
DATO LIM AH CHAP & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. consolidation of derivative actions. (Para 1 , 1 , 2) |
| 2. assessment of damages following interim injunctions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. principles governing appeal against damages. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. burden of proof on causation in damages assessment. (Para 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. principle of appellate discretion in reversing damage awards. (Para 13) |
| 6. causation and deceit impact on damages. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. causation and evidence evaluation for damages. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 8. assessment of damages on an undertaking principle. (Para 22) |
| 9. court's acceptance of concurrent findings. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 10. material non-disclosure affecting injunction granting. (Para 27 , 28 , 30) |
| 11. liability for damages awarded despite short injunction duration. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 12. affirmation of damages based on deceit. (Para 39 , 40) |
| 13. conclusion on damages issued with respect to fraudulent conduct. (Para 45) |
[1] In this appeal, four different suits were consolidated, namely Civil Suits No 22-52-2001, 22-94-2001, 22-95-2001 and 22-96-2001. The plaintiff, now the appellant, purportedly brought these four derivative actions on behalf of TK Mining Sdn Bhd and its shareholder. In Suit No
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
