Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
YAP TECK CHOW & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
YAP TECK LOKE & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. extension of time to set aside judgment. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. background facts of the dispute. (Para 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 3. nature of 1st defendant's application. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. principles on setting aside irregular judgments. (Para 12 , 14 , 16) |
| 5. legal principles on liquidated and unliquidated damages. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. estoppel and unconscionable conduct considerations. (Para 24 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. power of the court to set aside judgments. (Para 30) |
| 8. court's conclusion and order. (Para 31) |
Introduction
[1] The 1st defendant applied (Encl 39) pursuant to O 1A, O 2 rr 1, 3 and 5 and the inherent powers of the Court under O 92 r 4 Rules of Court 2012 (" ROC 2012") for an extension of time to apply to set aside a judgment dated 31 May 2013 entered in default ("JID") of him making an appearance (Encl 34).
[2] The JID was entered for a sum of RM4 million with interest thereon at 4% p.a. from an indeterminate date and costs on a solicitor-client basis grounded on the tort of conspiracy to injure by unlawful means.
[3] Having found that the pith and substance of the application was to set aside the JID, I had on 24 January 2025 set aside the JID with no order as to c
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
