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

2015 MarsdenLR 1776

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
WORTHY BUILDERS SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. the court reversed the finding on the bank's fiduciary duty. (Para 1 , 6 , 39)
2. the bank's claim was ultimately entitled to be upheld due to procedural noncompliance by the assignor. (Para 5 , 8 , 40)
3. legal obligations regarding notice and compliance in assignments are essential. (Para 10 , 21 , 30)
Hamid Sultan Abu Backer JCA:

[1] The appellant (bank) appeals against the decision of the learned High Court Judge who refused to enter judgment for the appellant against a claim for facility offered to the 1st respondent, Worthy Builders Sdn Bhd (Worthy), and entered judgment against the bank for debt owing from third parties to Worthy on the ground that the bank has breached its fiduciary duty of not carrying out Worthy's instructions to the bank. The 2nd and 3rd respondents are guarantors to the facility agreement. Other defendants in the original suit by Worthy (as plaintiff), ie Warisan Nusa Sdn Bhd (Warisan) and KUB Realty Sdn Bhd (KUB) are not appealing.

[2] In the instant case, the bank has given facility to Worthy in the sum of RM6 million and as security for the facility has obtained an assignment of proceeds for work to be done by Worthy for the UMNO buildi

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