CIVIL PROCEDURE : Injunction
14 cases · November 2023 to April 2026
Case Volume by Year
2 23
5 24
5 25
2 26
2023–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Fortuna injunction — Statutory demand under Companies Act 2016 — Whether statutory notice of demand constitutes abuse of process where debt disputed and civil proceedings pending — Whether Fortuna injunction should be granted to restrain presentation of winding-up petition — Whether winding-up notice justifiable despite pending civil suit and arbitration stay application 2 Performance bond — Advance payment bond — Application to restrain call on bonds — Whether demand on on-demand guarantee may be restrained — Whether strong prima facie evidence of unconscionability established — Whether Defendant already highly secured — Minimal risk of loss — Whether claims inflated, inconsistent or speculative — Balance of convenience — Preservation of status quo pending arbitration — s.11 Arbitration Act 2005 1 Interlocutory injunction — Quia timet injunction — Ingredients — Proof of imminent danger and substantial or irreparable damage. Restraint of Defendant from exercising shareholder rights and filing further legal proceedings. Preservation of status quo pending determination of share ownership. Prevention of multiplicity of proceedings. 1 Restraint from making public or social media comments regarding ongoing litigation — Principles of sub judice — Protecting court integrity and independence 1 Interlocutory mandatory injunction — High threshold — Whether applicant required to establish unusually strong and clear case — Distinction between prohibitory and mandatory injunction — Mandatory injunction — Degree of assurance — Whether court slow to grant mandatory relief where validity of underlying contract seriously disputed — Equity — Injunction — Adequacy of damages — Commercial dispute — Quantifiable loss — Whether damages constitute adequate remedy — Mere commercial inconvenience not irreparable harm. 1 Interim injunction — Delivery-up order — Setting aside — Whether the plaintiff provided full and frank disclosure to the court — Whether the plaintiff provided proof that the defendants have incriminating evidence — Whether the ex-parte injunction order was oppressive and extreme — Whether there is a high degree of assurance that the plaintiff will be able to prove its case 1 Fortuna injunction — Application to restrain filing of winding up petition — Statutory notice of demand based on adjudication decisions — Whether debt disputed on substantial grounds — Whether cross-claim rendered debt disputed — Whether balance of convenience lies in favour of granting injunction 1 Fortuna injunction — Restraint of winding-up petition — Balance of convenience — Whether abuse of process — Whether evidence of afterthought claims sufficient to establish dispute — Two-limb test for Fortuna injunction — Whether petition has no chance of success — Whether irreparable damage would result — Standard of proof for bona fide dispute — Timing of objections in commercial disputes — Whether claims of defective work raised after statutory notice relevant 1 Whether there are serious bona fide issues to be tried — Whether the confidential information has been sufficiently particularised — Whether the balance of convenience lies in the grant of the injunction 1 Mandatory interim injunction — Inter partes application — Test for granting — Whether mandatory interim injunction ought to be allowed 1 Mareva injunction — Allegations of misappropriation by directors of funds belonging to preference shareholders — Whether there was direct evidence of any risk that company might dispose of or dissipate assets or put assets beyond reach of investors — Whether dissipation risk is grounded in objective indicators or subjective disposition — Whether vital ingredients before Mareva injunction may be issued established — Rules of Court 2012, O.29 r.1. 1 Fortuna injunction — Claim for retention sum — Whether claim subject to letter of award — Whether debt is disputed 1 Application for mareva injunction — Whether there is a good arguable case — Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets — Whether all conditions for the grant of a mareva injunction have been met 1 Fortuna injunction — Claim for sums due to the Royal Malaysian Customs Department — Whether the defendant is a contingent or prospective creditor of the plaintiff — Whether the defendant has locus standi to issue the winding-up notice — Whether the defendant had chosen to claim for the debt by a procedure that might produce irreparable damage to the plaintiff 1
Fortuna injunction — Statutory demand under Companies Act 2016 — Whether statutory notice of demand constitutes abuse of process where debt disputed and civil proceedings pending — Whether Fortuna injunction should be granted to restrain presentation of winding-up petition — Whether winding-up notice justifiable despite pending civil suit and arbitration stay application 2 cases
wa-22ncc-151-03-2023 Nautilus Tug & Towage Sdn Bhd v 1. ) Dato' Seri Suresh Emmanuel Abishegam 2. ) Dato' Ahmad Johari bin Tun Abdul Razak 3. ) Ajaib Hari Dass 4. ) Dato' Abd Latiff bin Ahmad 5. ) Jaya Sudhir a/l Jayaram 6. ) Azian binti Abdul Aziz 7. ) Nautical Supreme Sdn Bhd 8. ) Azimuth Marine Sdn Bhd
11 December 2024
wa-24ncc-359-07-2024 CARIMIN ENGINEERING SERVICES SDN BHD v DYNAMIC NAVIGATION SDN BHD
24 October 2024
Performance bond — Advance payment bond — Application to restrain call on bonds — Whether demand on on-demand guarantee may be restrained — Whether strong prima facie evidence of unconscionability established — Whether Defendant already highly secured — Minimal risk of loss — Whether claims inflated, inconsistent or speculative — Balance of convenience — Preservation of status quo pending arbitration — s.11 Arbitration Act 2005 1 case
Interlocutory mandatory injunction — High threshold — Whether applicant required to establish unusually strong and clear case — Distinction between prohibitory and mandatory injunction — Mandatory injunction — Degree of assurance — Whether court slow to grant mandatory relief where validity of underlying contract seriously disputed — Equity — Injunction — Adequacy of damages — Commercial dispute — Quantifiable loss — Whether damages constitute adequate remedy — Mere commercial inconvenience not irreparable harm. 1 case
Interim injunction — Delivery-up order — Setting aside — Whether the plaintiff provided full and frank disclosure to the court — Whether the plaintiff provided proof that the defendants have incriminating evidence — Whether the ex-parte injunction order was oppressive and extreme — Whether there is a high degree of assurance that the plaintiff will be able to prove its case 1 case
Fortuna injunction — Application to restrain filing of winding up petition — Statutory notice of demand based on adjudication decisions — Whether debt disputed on substantial grounds — Whether cross-claim rendered debt disputed — Whether balance of convenience lies in favour of granting injunction 1 case
Fortuna injunction — Restraint of winding-up petition — Balance of convenience — Whether abuse of process — Whether evidence of afterthought claims sufficient to establish dispute — Two-limb test for Fortuna injunction — Whether petition has no chance of success — Whether irreparable damage would result — Standard of proof for bona fide dispute — Timing of objections in commercial disputes — Whether claims of defective work raised after statutory notice relevant 1 case
Whether there are serious bona fide issues to be tried — Whether the confidential information has been sufficiently particularised — Whether the balance of convenience lies in the grant of the injunction 1 case
Mandatory interim injunction — Inter partes application — Test for granting — Whether mandatory interim injunction ought to be allowed 1 case
Fortuna injunction — Claim for retention sum — Whether claim subject to letter of award — Whether debt is disputed 1 case
Application for mareva injunction — Whether there is a good arguable case — Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets — Whether all conditions for the grant of a mareva injunction have been met 1 case
Fortuna injunction — Claim for sums due to the Royal Malaysian Customs Department — Whether the defendant is a contingent or prospective creditor of the plaintiff — Whether the defendant has locus standi to issue the winding-up notice — Whether the defendant had chosen to claim for the debt by a procedure that might produce irreparable damage to the plaintiff 1 case
Key Statutes
Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
cited in 5 cases Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 3 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Arbitration Act 2005 (Cap 646)
cited in 2 cases Goods and Services Tax Act 2014
cited in 1 case GST Act
cited in 1 case EPF Act
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Top Firms
Shearn Delamore & Co. 2 Rahmat Lim & Partners 2 S Ravenesan 1 W.J. Sia Law Chambers 1 T Tharuma & Associates 1 Robert Low & Ooi 1 Law Chambers of Shakila 1 Lee & Poh Partnership 1 Ringo Low & Associates 1 Cheang & Ariff 1 JW Wong & Partner 1 Rosli Dahlan Saravana Partnership 1 Lim Chee Wee Partnership 1 Ghandi 1 Chetan Jethwani & Company 1
Cases
wa-24ncc-57-01-2026
KAYANGAN KEMAS SDN BHD v 1. ) EXYTE MALAYSIA SDN BHD 2. ) AMBANK (M) BERHAD
26 April 2026
MYHC
ja-22ncc-37-05-2023
1. ) Mohd Azizul bin Mohd Nasir 2. ) Ahmad Akid bin Noor Azlee v Shakib bin Abu Bakar Banafee
3 March 2026
MYHC
aa-22ncvc-39-05-2025
HTMALTEC CONSULTANTS SDN. BHD. v CHOY KWAI YING
8 October 2025
MYHC
wa-22ip-72-09-2024
SWISSLOG MALAYSIA SDN BHD v 1. ) GAN SOON KIAT 2. ) CHANG JUN QIANG 3. ) PANG KENT YAN 4. ) VIVIAN KHEW WEI MAN 5. ) YEOH WOOI MENG 6. ) YEOH TAN CHIN AUN 7. ) CHUAH TONG SIN 8. ) TAN WEI MING 9. ) YAP YEE HUANG 10. ) TIU YEE SENG 11. ) WOODTREES SDN BHD 12. ) WOODTREES ANGEL PLT
27 May 2025
MYHC
wa-24ncc-610-12-2024
PESAT BUMI SDN BHD v GEO HILL CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD
27 April 2025
MYHC
wa-24ncc-463-09-2024
Christine Resort Sdn Bd v Pachira Eco Garden Associates Sdn Bhd
5 February 2025
MYHC
wa-22ip-24-03-2024
ITS Testing Services (M) Sdn Bhd v 1. ) DP Fluiteq Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) Dev Menon A/L Gopalan 3. ) Peter Chang Ngi Lee 4. ) Murugan A/L Selvaraj PIHAK KETIGA DICADANGKAN Carigali-PTTEPI Operating Company Sdn Bhd
2 February 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-151-03-2023
Nautilus Tug & Towage Sdn Bhd v 1. ) Dato' Seri Suresh Emmanuel Abishegam 2. ) Dato' Ahmad Johari bin Tun Abdul Razak 3. ) Ajaib Hari Dass 4. ) Dato' Abd Latiff bin Ahmad 5. ) Jaya Sudhir a/l Jayaram 6. ) Azian binti Abdul Aziz 7. ) Nautical Supreme Sdn Bhd 8. ) Azimuth Marine Sdn Bhd
11 December 2024
MYHC
wa-24-84-09-2024
1. ) KARNAN A/L RAJANTHIRAN 2. ) SURESH A/L BALA KRISHNAN 3. ) DACTNESWARAN A/L KANDASAMY 4. ) THANASEGARAN A/L ALAIMOHAN 5. ) RAJASEGARAN A/L MARIMUTHU 6. ) RAJENTHIRAN A. SUBRAMANIAM 7. ) DAYALAN A/L SREEBALAN 8. ) ELANGO A/L RASAMUNIANDY v FIRDAUS WONG WAI HUNG
2 December 2024
MYHC
wa-22m-791-07-2024
1. ) ETIHAD CONSULTANCY 2. ) MOHD JAMIL BIN MAAH 3. ) SHUHAINA BINTI MOHAMMAD 4. ) RADHIAH BINTI SHUKRI 5. ) SHUKRI BIN MA'AIL 6. ) ABDEL AZIZ BIN SAHRIM 7. ) ZALALUDIN BIN SLAMAT 8. ) ROZILAH BINTI MAAH 9. ) AZREEN EZHAM BIN ANWAR WAJDI 10. ) AB HAKIM AMER BIN MOHD DAUD 11. ) NORIDAH BINTI MOHAMMAD 12. ) ROSYATIMAH BINTI MUNAWER 13. ) PARIZAH BINTI MAT LODIN 14. ) ZAINAB BINTI AHMAD 15. ) FARIDAH BINTI TAHIR 16. ) ABDUL ADE BIN SAIMAN 17. ) AMIN ASHRAF BIN MUHAMAD 18. ) FARIDAH BINTI HUSSAIN...
21 November 2024
MYHC
wa-24ncc-359-07-2024
CARIMIN ENGINEERING SERVICES SDN BHD v DYNAMIC NAVIGATION SDN BHD
24 October 2024
MYHC
wa-24ncc-516-09-2023
IMPERO LAND SDN BHD v ANEKA JARINGAN SDN BHD
22 January 2024
MYHC
wa-22ncc-544-08-2023
SIM KWANG KAI, ADRIAN v JOHNATHAN WONG FUTT PO PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) CHEONG MUN HONG 2. ) SIGNATURE HEALTHLAND SDN BHD 3. ) Yew Yee Tee
13 December 2023
MYHC
wa-24ncc-460-08-2023
MAJU HOLDINGS SDN BHD v LIM SOW WU
26 November 2023
MYHC