CJ POLYMERS SDN BHD v 1. ) LOK PEY LING 2. ) KERK JIUN HONG 3. ) WAKIL DIRI KEPADA TEE YOK LAN @ TAY ENG LUN, SI MATI
ba-22ncvc-527-12-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 27 August 2025 • BA-22NCvC-527-12/2023 • 14 min read
31 cases cited
(0 SG, 31 foreign)
Catchwords
1. The present suit was instituted by the Plaintiff company against three Defendants for the restitution and recovery of monies alleged to have been wrongfully received. 2. These payments, made by the Plaintiff company, were authorised by its then director, Kerk Han Meng. What lends this case its distinctive complexion is that the First, Second, and Third Defendants are, respectively, Kerk’s wife, son, and mother-in-law. Of further significance is that the accounts and records of the Plaintiff company disclose a similar pattern of payments of salaries or allowances to another director’s family members, namely, his ex-wife, son, and mother. However, the Plaintiff company has not prosecuted a claim against the other director’s ex-wife, son and mother. 3. The Plaintiff contended that these payments were without legal basis and must be restored. The Defendants, however, stood firm in their defence, insisting that the sums were lawfully paid and lawfully received. In any event, it was also contended by the Defendants that the claims are time barred. At its core, the contest is whether these familial transactions were legitimate dealings, or whether they amount to an unjust depletion of the Plaintiff’s assets, leaving its claim, if proven, with compelling merit.
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
CJ POLYMERS SDN BHD v 1. ) LOK PEY LING 2. ) KERK JIUN HONG 3. ) WAKIL DIRI K... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated August 27, 2025 (citation: ba-22ncvc-527-12-2023). The case was decided by Choong Yeow Choy.
What was the outcome of CJ POLYMERS SDN BHD v 1. ) LOK PEY LING 2. ) KERK JIUN HONG 3. ) WAKIL DIRI K...?
CJ POLYMERS SDN BHD v 1. ) LOK PEY LING 2. ) KERK JIUN HONG 3. ) WAKIL DIRI K... is a High Court decision dated August 27, 2025. The case was heard by Choong Yeow Choy. See the full judgment for details.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (31)
UK (1)
[1970] Ch 62
MY (30)
[1976] 2 MLJ 227 [1992] 1 AMR 269 [1992] 2 MLJ 571 [1999] 5 MLRH 248 [1999] AMEJ 0238 [2000] 2 MLJ 334 [2005] 8 CLJ 624 [2006] 1 MLRH 32 [2006] 3 MLJ 756 [2012] 3 AMR 297 [2012] 3 MLJ 616 [2012] 5 CLJ 169 [2015] 2 AMR 601 [2015] 2 CLJ 453 [2015] 2 MLJ 441 [2015] 3 CLJ 663 [2015] 7 MLJ 408 [2015] MLJU 1884 [2017] 2 AMR 341 [2017] 2 MLJ 1 [2017] 7 CLJ 513 [2018] 2 CLJ 641 [2018] 2 MLJ 177 [2018] 3 MLJ 114 [2023] 1 CLJ 346 [2023] 2 MLJ 90 [2024] AMEJ 0105 [2024] MLJU 144 [2025] AMEJ 1211 [2025] MLJU 1551
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ba-22ncvc-527-12-2023)