Tan Kheng Guan (Mendakwa Bagi Pihak Dirinya Sendiri Dan Pemegang Saham Syarikat Defendan Ketiga Shigen Polycolor Sdn. Bhd., Selain Daripada Defendan Pertama Dan Defendan Kedua) v 1. ) CHU KOK KHING 2. ) EE GENG CHOON 3. ) SHIGEN POLYCOLOR SDN BHD 4. ) SHIFTY TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD 5. ) LEW THEN BOO 6. ) TANG GAIK TENG 7. ) SCONEY TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD 8. ) LOO CHUI LI 9. ) KHOR KHUAN HWA 10. ) SUTERA IDEA SDN BHD 11. ) CHU YEIN HOON 12. ) SHINES PIGMENTS MASTERBATCH (M) SDN BHD 13. ) LOO TIANG MENG ...

pa-22ncvc-223-11-2017 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 17 November 2024 • PA-22NCvC-223-11/2017 • 17 min read
4 cases cited (0 SG, 4 foreign)

Catchwords

First and foremost, it is an agreed and obvious fact that an undertaking by the Defendants has been made to this court for the Defendants not to dispose of their movable and immovable assets. This is perfectly drawn up and reflected in the fair order dated 29.1.2024 at Enclosure 327. These undertaking given by the Defendants themselves in the stay Order is clear and unambiguous. In Halsbury's Law of England (4th edn) vol. 44 at para 255, it is authored: Enforcement of undertakings. Where a solicitor who is acting professionally for a client gives his personal undertaking in that character to the client or to a third person, or gives an undertaking to the court in the course of proceedings, that undertaking may be enforced summarily upon application to the court. Before this remedy can be pursued it must be shown that the undertaking is given by the solicitor personally, and not merely as agent on behalf of his client. The undertaking must also be given by the solicitor, not as an individual, but in his professional capacity as a solicitor... The undertaking must be clear in its terms. The whole of the agreement to which it relates must be before the court, and the undertaking must be one which is not impossible ab initio for the solicitor to perform. Nevertheless, an undertaking will be enforced against the solicitor even though, after it is given, the client dies or instructs the solicitor not to perform it or changes his solicitor...

Judges (1)

Rozana binti Ali Yusoff Delivered

Counsel (6)

Ismail Khoo & Associates Firm Tan Wei Cheat & Co. Firm John Khoo Counsel Defendant Low Kai Xin Counsel Plaintiff Martin Khoo Counsel Defendant Tan Wei Cheat Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (22)

Magnum Trade Sdn Bhd Defendant SCONEY TECHNOLOGY Sdn Bhd Defendant SHIFTY TECHNOLOGY Sdn Bhd Defendant SHINES PIGMENTS MASTERBATCH Sdn Bhd Defendant SUTERA IDEA Sdn Bhd Defendant Shigen Polycolor Sdn Bhd Defendant Chu Kok Khing Defendant Chu Sooi Teng Defendant Chu Yein Hoon Defendant Ee Geng Choon Defendant Kang Leen Leen Defendant Khor Khuan Hwa Defendant Lau Kean Yang Defendant Lew Then Boo Defendant Liew Chai Sun Defendant Lim Sua Lin Defendant Loo Chui Li Defendant Loo Tiang Meng Defendant Low Boon Chua Defendant Tan Kheng Guan Defendant Tan Kheng Guan Plaintiff Tang Gaik Teng Defendant

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (4)

MY (4)
[1999] 3 MLJ 1 [2007] 4 CLJ 725 [2007] 5 MLJ 501 [2014] 10 MLJ 413

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-22ncvc-223-11-2017)