Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD – Appellant
Versus
TAN CHONG WHATT & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the appeal and guarantee details. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. contention on guarantors' liability and uob's duties. (Para 3 , 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 3. court's analysis on legal interpretations. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. federal court's principles regarding guarantor liabilities. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. impact of principal debtor status under contracts. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. rights of uob for post winding-up interest. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 7. clarification of uob's contractual obligations. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. rejection of respondents' assertions regarding uob's duties. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 45 , 46) |
| 9. resolution of appeals with consequential orders. (Para 47 , 48) |
Introduction
[1] This appeal emanates from a High Court decision dated 10 May 2022 wherein the learned High Court judge dismissed the appellant's claim.
[2] The appellant, United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd ("UOB"), claimed against the respondents premised on a guarantee dated 25 November 2014 ("the Guarantee"). The Guarantee was executed by the respondents together with two others, namely Gerald Yeo @ Yeo Ah Khe and Wang YingDe, who agreed to be jointly and severally liab
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
