1. ) OYES MOTOR SPORTS SDN. BHD. 2. ) YEONG KEE TECK v SU HOCK GUAN BUKAN PIHAK-PIHAK YEONG JOO HOCK
Catchwords
1. The Court has before it five applications including Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order. 2. Having considered all submissions, the Court finds the Plaintiffs established a good arguable and prima facie case of misappropriation and breach of fiduciary duty. 3. There is evidence of risk of asset dissipation and possible destruction of relevant documents. 4. The Plaintiffs’ standing is provisionally accepted at this interlocutory stage on grounds of necessity due to deadlock. 5. The Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order are therefore maintained pending full trial. 6. Defendant’s applications to set aside and for stay are dismissed. 7. Costs are to follow the cause.
Practice Areas
1. The Court has before it five applications including Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order. 2. Having considered all submissions, the Court finds the Plaintiffs established a good arguable and prima facie case of misappropriation and breach of fiduciary duty. 3. There is evidence of risk of asset dissipation and possible destruction of relevant documents. 4. The Plaintiffs’ standing is provisionally accepted at this interlocutory stage on grounds of necessity due to deadlock. 5. The Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order are therefore maintained pending full trial. 6. Defendant’s applications to set aside and for stay are dismissed. 7. Costs are to follow the cause.
Judges (1)
Case Significance
1. ) OYES MOTOR SPORTS SDN. BHD. 2. ) YEONG KEE TECK v SU HOCK GUAN BUKAN PIH... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated September 29, 2025 (citation: ja-22ncvc-75-06-2025). The case was decided by Noradura binti Hamzah.
Key issues: 1. The Court has before it five applications including Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order..
What was the outcome of 1. ) OYES MOTOR SPORTS SDN. BHD. 2. ) YEONG KEE TECK v SU HOCK GUAN BUKAN PIH...?
1. ) OYES MOTOR SPORTS SDN. BHD. 2. ) YEONG KEE TECK v SU HOCK GUAN BUKAN PIH... is a High Court decision dated September 29, 2025. The case was heard by Noradura binti Hamzah. See the full judgment for details.