COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SITI NUR AISHAH ISHAK – Appellant
Versus
GOLDEN PLUS HOLDINGS BERHAD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction of high court to hear winding-up petitions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. facts supporting the winding-up petition. (Para 3 , 4 , 9) |
| 3. arguments on the appropriate court for jurisdiction. (Para 5 , 6 , 12 , 13 , 19) |
| 4. jurisdictional basis for appeal regarding winding-up. (Para 10) |
| 5. court's analysis on jurisdictional factors. (Para 14 , 15 , 17 , 21) |
| 6. court's authority based on geographic jurisdiction. (Para 16) |
| 7. affirmation of high court jurisdiction framework. (Para 18 , 32) |
[1] At the High Court, the respondent's application to strike out the above winding-up Petition made pursuant to s 23(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Act 91) and/or O 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and/or (d) of the Rules of 2012 and/or inherent jurisdiction of the Court, was allowed with no order as to costs. The appellant/Petitioner appealed. Upon hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, we allowed the appeal with costs of RM10,000.00 subject to payment of allocatur.
[2] The appeal turns on the narrow issue of the jurisdiction of the High Court of Malaya to hear the present winding-up Petition; it being contended by the respondent that the Petition fel
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.