WAN ROHIMI WAN DAUD & ANOR vs ABDULLAH CHE HASSAN & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 303

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
WAN ROHIMI WAN DAUD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
ABDULLAH CHE HASSAN & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Table of Content
1. overview of the appeal details and plaintiffs' background. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. summary of plaintiffs' claim and defendants' defence. (Para 8 , 9)
3. court's observation on the facts presented during the trial. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. discussion of core issues and decision-making principles applied. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26)
5. conclusion on the necessity of fiduciary duties in legal contexts. (Para 25 , 28 , 30)
6. final verdict and outcome of appeals. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)

Vernon Ong JCA:

Introduction

[1] The two appeals herein relate to a decision of the High Court sitting in Kota Bharu which allowed part of the plaintiffs' claim whereby the defendants were required to produce particulars of each of the plaintiffs' entitlements to the judgment sum.

[2] Appeal 1850 is the defendants' appeal whilst Appeal 1881 is the plaintiffs' appeal. In this judgment, the parties shall be referred to as they were in the Court below.

The Salient Facts

[3] The 271 plaintiffs are settlers in Rancangan Felda Kemahang.

[4] The defendants are partners of a legal firm ("the Firm") which had acted for the plaintiffs to initiate proceedings against Lembag

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 303

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAWAN ROHIMI WAN DAUD & ANOR – AppellantVersusABDULLAH CHE HASSAN & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
WAN ROHIMI WAN DAUD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
ABDULLAH CHE HASSAN & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent