PROTASCO BHD vs TEY POR YEE & ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 580

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PROTASCO BHD – Appellant
Versus
TEY POR YEE & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:S Sivaneindiren,Peter Skelchy,Joycelyn Teoh ,Respondent Advocate: Effa Ruzanna Annuar,Lim Hui Li

Table of Content
1. the decision on whether proceedings should proceed against non-parties hinges on the intertwining issues of the arbitration agreement. (Para 1 , 4 , 6)
2. factual details underscore the alleged fraudulent actions by tey and ooi related to the contractual agreements. (Para 18 , 19 , 21)
3. legal principles regarding the stay of proceedings against non-parties and maintaining the integrity of arbitration procedures are pivotal. (Para 32 , 49 , 90)

Nallini Pathmanathan JCA:

[1] These appeals arise as a consequence of the decision of the High Court to grant a stay of proceedings to the respective respondents in these appeals, pending arbitration of a dispute between the appellant and one PT Anglo Slavic Utama (PT ASU).

[2] In the Court below, the appellant who is the plaintiff (Protasco) had brought a claim against the said PT ASU as the 1st defendant, Tey Por Yee (Tey) as the 2nd defendant and Ooi Kock Aun (Ooi) as the 3rd defendant.

[3] The dispute between Protasco and PT ASU was governed by an arbitration clause in the sale and purchase agreement executed? Between them, giving rise to an agreement to arbitrate in the event of any difference or dispute arising between th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 580

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAPROTASCO BHD – AppellantVersusTEY POR YEE & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PROTASCO BHD – Appellant
Versus
TEY POR YEE & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent