SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 MarsdenLR 668

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GOO SING KAR – Appellant
Versus
DATO LIM AH CHAP & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: C-02-119-2008]



Petitioner Advocates:Wong Kian Kheong,Khoo Kay Ping,Karin Lim ,Respondent Advocate: Cyrus V Dass,David Dinesh Mathew

The undertaking to pay damages for improperly granted injunctions obligates the plaintiff to compensate all resulting losses, irrespective of foreseeability or duration of the injunctions.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Rules of the High Court 1980 - Derivative Action - Assessment of Damages - Plaintiff appealed the damages awarded against him concerning his undertaking to pay damages for interim injunctions which he obtained deceitfully. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's finding that the plaintiff must compensate for all losses directly caused by the injunctions. (Paras 1-38)

(B) Undisclosed Material Facts - The Court highlighted that the plaintiff failed to disclose critical facts, leading to the wrongful grant of injunctions, thus entitling the defendants to claim damages for losses suffered. (Paras 27-33)

(C) Quantum of Damages - The Court ruled that damages awarded by the deputy registrar were justified based on the evidence and sound principles, despite the short duration of the injunctions. (Paras 20-35)

Facts of the case:
The appellant obtained four ex parte injunctions against the defendants, effectively causing significant financial damages to their companies. The injunctions were subsequently set aside for being granted based on deceit, including neglecting to disclose a settlement agreement that had been previously established between parties.

Findings of Court:
The High Court judge confirmed damages amounting to RM17,847,041.60 based on comprehensive evidence of loss attributed to the injunctions.

Issues: The main issues included whether the damages were assessed correctly and if any serious errors were made by the trial judge or deputy registrar.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that damages must be compensatory and reflect losses directly caused by the wrongful injunctions while emphasizing the importance of full and honest disclosure in obtaining such injunctions.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. consolidation of derivative actions. (Para 1 , 1 , 2)
2. assessment of damages following interim injunctions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. principles governing appeal against damages. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. burden of proof on causation in damages assessment. (Para 11 , 12 , 18)
5. principle of appellate discretion in reversing damage awards. (Para 13)
6. causation and deceit impact on damages. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
7. causation and evidence evaluation for damages. (Para 20 , 21)
8. assessment of damages on an undertaking principle. (Para 22)
9. court's acceptance of concurrent findings. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)
10. material non-disclosure affecting injunction granting. (Para 27 , 28 , 30)
11. liability for damages awarded despite short injunction duration. (Para 34 , 35 , 36)
12. affirmation of damages based on deceit. (Para 39 , 40)
13. conclusion on damages issued with respect to fraudulent conduct. (Para 45)

[1] In this appeal, four different suits were consolidated, namely Civil Suits No 22-52-2001, 22-94-2001, 22-95-2001 and 22-96-2001. The plaintiff, now the appellant, purportedly brought these four derivative actions on behalf of TK Mining Sdn Bhd and its shareholder. In Suit No 22-52-2001, TK Mining Sdn Bhd appeared as a nominal 3rd defendant. The 1st defendant in all the suits was one Datuk Lim Ah Chap who, at the material times, owned 50% of the shareholding of TK Mining Sdn Bhd with the appellant/plaintiff owning the other 50%. In respect of suit no 22-52-2001, the other defendants were Minat Deras Sdn Bhd, Hormat Abadi Sdn Bhd, Impianox Sdn Bhd, and three other persons (Ahmad Al Kamar bin Mohd Baria, Abdul Halim bin Jalil and Irdawati binti Muhammad Ishak). These three other persons were sued as essentially nominees of Datuk Lim Ah Chap. In respect of the other suits, the defendants, aside from Datuk Lim, were;

(a) 22-94-2001

TK Sawmill Trading Sdn Bhd (as 2nd defendant)

(b) 22-95-2001

Seng Chap Wah Timber Merchant Sdn Bhd (as 2nd defendant)

(c) 22-96-2001

Metro Istimewa Sdn Bhd (as 2nd defendant)

[2] These three other civil suits, like Civil Suit No 22-52-2001, were all instituted as derivative actions for and on behalf of TK Mining Sdn Bhd.

Subject Matter: Assessment And Award Of Damages On Plaintiff's Undertaking To Pay Damages In Relation To Interim Injunctions

[3] This appeal concerned an assessment of damages based on the plaintiff 's undertakings to pay damages in relation to four interim injunctions that had been granted by the High Court in his favour in each of the separate suits mentioned earlier. These interim injunctions were granted on 10 January 2002 on ex parte applications by the plaintiff. All were set aside on 24 January 2002 on ex parte applications being made by the respective defendants. The learned Judicial Commissioner (now Ramly Ali, JCA), in setting aside the injunctions, also ordered that an immediate enquiry into damages arising from the undertaking to pay damages be assessed by the deputy registrar. The decision of the learned Judicial Commissioner is reported in [2002] 2 CLJ 250. The deputy registrar conducted the enquiry which involved 17 witnesses and some 185 pages of notes of evidence. By the registrar's certificate, damages totalling RM17,887,038.70 was awarded to all the respondents.

[4] The plaintiff then appealed to the High Court Judge under O 56 of the Rules of the High 1980. The High Court Judge dismissed the appeal, but reduced the amount of damages marginally to RM17,847,041.60to correct a mathematical error.

[5] The full particulars of the damages ordered to be paid are as follows:

(a) Damages for inconvenience and embarrassment awarded to each of the respondents in the sum of RM20,000 each, totalling RM220,000.

(b) RM15 million as damages to Datuk Lim Ah Chap (the 1st respondent) for losses suffered by TK Mining Sdn Bhd, TK Sawmill Sdn Bhd, Minat Deras Sdn Bhd, Hormat Abadi Sdn Bhd, and Impianox Sdn Bhd. (All these companies comprised companies within the group of companies initially own

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top