Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
NG HOO KUI & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
WENDY TAN LEE PENG & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. clarification on the applicability of the 'plainly wrong' test for appellate court decisions. (Para 1) |
| 2. nature of the payments made by ng. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. the sole question of law focuses on the test for appellate intervention in reversing factual findings. (Para 4) |
| 4. the trial judge's findings were that tek held shares in avd for ng as a constructive trustee. (Para 19) |
| 5. assessment of the credibility of witnesses in resolving disputes over capital contributions. (Para 22) |
[1] At the Federal Court, the appellant was granted leave to appeal on the sole question of law as follows:
"Whether the application of the "plainly wrong" test by an appeal Court in reversing the findings of facts by a trial Court should be subject to guidelines and whether the guidelines laid down by the UK Supreme Court in Henderson v. Foxworth Investments Ltd and Another [2014] 1 WLR 2600 and Mc Graddie v. Mc Graddie and Another [2013] 1 WLR 2477 should be adopted as the relevant guidelines or such other guidelines as may be relevant or appropriate?"
[2] The aforesaid leave question arises as a result of the decision of the Court of Appeal which reversed the decision of the High Court on fi
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
