NG KIM PIN PIHAK TERKILAN Ooi Kim Geik

ba-28pw-245-07-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 20 November 2025 • BA-28PW-245-07/2025

Catchwords

Application for leave to pursue appeal in the name of company—Section 486(2) Companies Act 2016—Company in compulsory liquidation—Official Receiver declining to pursue appeal—Court’s discretion—Applicable threshold—Whether proposed appeal has probable or at least arguable chance of success—Whether appeal frivolous, vexatious or oppressive—Whether continuation of proceedings in interests of company or creditors—Underlying action alleging misappropriation of company funds by deceased director dismissed—Findings of fact and credibility against company—Unreliable and altered accounting records—Failure to prove personal receipt or wrongful appropriation—Rejection of documentary evidence—Section 90A Evidence Act 1950—Limitation—Knowledge of alleged withdrawals long before suit commenced—Appellate restraint against interference with factual findings—Proposed appeal amounting to re-litigation—Underlying suit found to be mala fide—Absence of exceptional circumstances justifying further proceedings—Speculative prospect of recovery insufficient—Official Receiver’s refusal and lack of creditor support relevant—Costs and delay militating against appeal—Leave refused—Consequential application to appoint solicitors dismissed—Costs awarded personally against contributory.

Practice Areas

Application for leave to pursue appeal in the name of company—Section 486(2) Companies Act 2016—Company in compulsory liquidation—Official Receiver declining to pursue appeal—Court’s discretion—Applicable threshold—Whether proposed appeal has probable or at least arguable chance of success—Whether appeal frivolous, vexatious or oppressive—Whether continuation of proceedings in interests of company or creditors—Underlying action alleging misappropriation of company funds by deceased director dismissed—Findings of fact and credibility against company—Unreliable and altered accounting records—Failure to prove personal receipt or wrongful appropriation—Rejection of documentary evidence—Section 90A Evidence Act 1950—Limitation—Knowledge of alleged withdrawals long before suit commenced—Appellate restraint against interference with factual findings—Proposed appeal amounting to re-litigation—Underlying suit found to be mala fide—Absence of exceptional circumstances justifying further proceedings—Speculative prospect of recovery insufficient—Official Receiver’s refusal and lack of creditor support relevant—Costs and delay militating against appeal—Leave refused—Consequential application to appoint solicitors dismissed—Costs awarded personally against contributory.

Judges (1)

Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran Delivered

Parties (2)

Ng Kim Pin Applicant Ooi Kim Geik Aggrieved Party

Case Significance

NG KIM PIN PIHAK TERKILAN Ooi Kim Geik is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated November 20, 2025 (citation: ba-28pw-245-07-2025). The case was decided by Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran.

What was the outcome of NG KIM PIN PIHAK TERKILAN Ooi Kim Geik?

NG KIM PIN PIHAK TERKILAN Ooi Kim Geik is a High Court decision dated November 20, 2025. The case was heard by Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran. See the full judgment for details.