Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
MOHD FARID MOHAMED SANGIDO – Appellant
Versus
ACE CREDIT (M) SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of investment agreements and terms. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. background of the case and parties' positions. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. parties' contentions regarding transactions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's analysis of issues in dispute. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. interpretation of contract terms and obligations. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. evaluation of claims under the moneylenders act. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 7. assessment of guarantee obligations. (Para 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62) |
| 8. court ruling on the liabilities of defendants. (Para 74 , 75 , 76) |
| 9. defendants' counterclaim outlined. (Para 83 , 84 , 85) |
| 10. summary of court orders and final judgment. (Para 87) |
A. Introduction
[1] This is one of many cases where the Defendants have been sued concerning the Investment Agreements entered between various individuals, the First Defendant and in some cases allegedly guaranteed by the Second and Third Defendants.
B. Background Facts
[2] The Plaintiff and the First Defendant did enter into the following agreements:
[3] Material terms of the said Investment Agreements are as follows:
Section 2 .01 The Investment and N
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
