Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CALIPH CONSULTANCY GROUP SDN BHD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
ONE TWO ONE ADVISOR SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to application and court's dismissal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background on plaintiffs' relationship with the 4th defendant. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. details on commission allocation and plaintiffs' allegations. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. claims regarding misappropriation and defendants' response. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. court's analysis of information protection considerations. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. confusion over confidentiality versus protective orders. (Para 21 , 23 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. legal tests for issuing confidentiality orders. (Para 29 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. criteria for granting confidentiality orders. (Para 36 , 37) |
| 9. extent of information dissemination impacting confidentiality. (Para 41 , 42) |
| 10. decision against granting confidentiality order. (Para 43 , 44) |
A. Introduction
[1] The plaintiffs filed an application ("Plaintiffs' Application") to seek an order for identified documents and information (collectively, the "Information") to be treated in the manner as detailed in the Plaintiffs' Application. The Information is in exhibits "MH-37" and "MH-38" of the affidavit in support of the plaintiffs' application for an injunction ("Plaintiffs' Inju
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
