Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
DATO SUHAIMY OTHMAN – Appellant
Versus
INFINITY TRUSTEE BERHAD & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties involved and their roles (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. details of plaintiff's investment and agreements (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 3. defendants' defenses to the claim (Para 33) |
| 4. court's assessment and validity of agreements (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 5. pleadings and evidence rules (Para 42 , 43) |
| 6. privity of contract doctrine and claims (Para 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 7. misrepresentation claims and burden of proof (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 8. judgment and outcome (Para 56) |
Introduction
[1] Plaintiff's cause of action against Defendants was for an alleged breach of Subscription Agreements between Plaintiff and Asia Cornerstone Asset Management Company Limited (Asia Cornerstone). Plaintiff further contended misrepresentation by the 2nd Defendant, resulting in Plaintiff investing in the scheme and not receiving payments as scheduled.
[2] After hearing witnesses from both parties, on the balance of probabilities, I have dismissed Plaintiff's claim with cost to the Defendants.
[3] Plaintiff has now appealed to the Court of Appeal, and
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
