Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
PLUS THREE CONSULTANTS (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
LANDASAN KAPITAL (M) SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. engagement of consultancy and counterclaims (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. background of consultancy regarding arbitration (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. scope of services by p3 detailed in the proposal (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. disputes regarding the adequacy of fee estimates and invoices (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. allegations of overcharging and concerns raised (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. legal definitions of agency and fiduciary duties (Para 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 7. concluding remarks on fiduciary breach and payments owed (Para 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104) |
(Enclosure 1)
Prologue
[1] In the matter before me, the Plaintiff who are known as Plus Three Consultants (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd ("P3") were engaged by Landasan Kapital (M) Sdn Bhd ("LKSB") to carry out consultancy work in respect of arbitration proceedings.
[2] P3 had allegedly presented LKSB with monthly invoices and timesheets that P3 claims were never challenged by LKSB. However, Despite This, P3 Claims That Lksb Have Refused To Settle The Outstanding Invoices.
[3] LKSB in their Defence and Counterclaim, contended that they are not obliged to settle the outstanding debt of RM1,880,378.42 and they are claiming for the ret
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
