Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
WONG YEE BOON – Appellant
Versus
GAINVEST BUILDERS (M) SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the introducer agreement's validity hinges on public policy. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. judicial interpretation must refrain from evolving public policy without legislative guidance. (Para 12 , 35) |
| 3. understanding legality of agreements involving influence. (Para 14) |
| 4. the principle of merit in proving contractual obligations must be established. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 5. dependency on context of public policy violations. (Para 21 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. public policy must be supported by indisputable evidence of harm. (Para 26 , 29) |
| 7. judicial limitation on public policy inference. (Para 34 , 62 , 64) |
| 8. the absence of proven illegality necessitates dismissal of appeal. (Para 94 , 126) |
[1] The appellant instituted a claim against the respondent in the High Court at Kuala Lumpur, for some payment pursuant to an agreement entered between them, known as an Introducer Agreement. The claim was dismissed by the High Court, as the Introducer Agreement was found to be an illegal contract pursuant to s 24 of the Contracts Act 1950 , applying the principle of law as enunciated by this Court in Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Dato' Shazryl Eskay Abdullah, [2015] 5 MLJ 619. The appeal of the appellant a
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
