p-02ncvca-431-03-2024 — 1. ) ANDREW HENG 2. ) MASMEYER DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (Dalam Likuidasi) v CHONG KOK WOOI (bertindak atas kapasiti sendiri dan juga mewakili kumpulan pemilik-pemilik unit kondominium Marinox Sky Villas)

Catchwords

leave of court is required in an action or a proceeding against a liquidator- that leave is required before an action can be filed against a liquidator of a wound-up company- since the leave of court was not obtained before the OS was filed, the plaintiff’s OS is incompetent and should be disallowed- The powers of the liquidator in a winding up by the Court order is provided for by section 486 of the CA As a court appointed liquidator, the 1st defendant is an officer of the court, hence leave of court is required before any action or proceeding is taken against him The need for leave before any proceedings may be commenced against a liquidator is to ensure that he could carry out his statutory duty without having to defend any unnecessary litigation that may hinder the winding up process of a company In view of the onerous statutory duty of a liquidator, there should not be any preference to any class of person who wishes to commence a proceeding against a liquidator

Practice Areas

leave of court is required in an action or a proceeding against a liquidator- that leave is required before an action can be filed against a liquidator of a wound-up company- since the leave of court was not obtained before the OS was filed, the plaintiff’s OS is incompetent and should be disallowed- The powers of the liquidator in a winding up by the Court order is provided for by section 486 of the CA As a court appointed liquidator, the 1st defendant is an officer of the court, hence leave of court is required before any action or proceeding is taken against him The need for leave before any proceedings may be commenced against a liquidator is to ensure that he could carry out his statutory duty without having to defend any unnecessary litigation that may hinder the winding up process of a company In view of the onerous statutory duty of a liquidator, there should not be any preference to any class of person who wishes to commence a proceeding against a liquidator

Judges (3)

Azhahari Kamal bin Ramli Delivered Ismail bin Brahim Coram Supang Lian Coram

Counsel (6)

BC Teh & Yeoh Firm T.Y. Teh & Partners Firm Datuk Teh Tse Yee Counsel Appellant Khaw Yit Hao Counsel Respondent Lim Jin Wen Counsel Appellant Wong Xin Tian, Cindy Counsel Appellant

Parties (3)

MASMEYER DEVELOPMENT Sdn Bhd. (Dalam Likuidasi) Appellant Andrew Heng Appellant Chong Kok Wooi (bertindak Atas Kapasiti Sendiri Dan Juga Mewakili Kumpulan Pemilik-pemilik Unit Kondominium Marinox Sky Villas) Respondent

Summary

Liquidator of Masmeyer Development appealed a High Court order reducing administrative fees for executing property transfers for Marinox Sky Villas purchasers. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding leave of court was required before commencing proceedings against a liquidator.

What was the outcome of 1. ) ANDREW HENG 2. ) MASMEYER DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (Dalam Likuidasi) v CHON...?

<p>Liquidator of Masmeyer Development appealed a High Court order reducing administrative fees for executing property transfers for Marinox Sky Villas...

Statutes Cited

Companies Act 2016

s 417(1)

Companies Act 1965 (Cap 777)

s 236(3)

Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)

Cases Cited (7)

MY (7)

[1995] 3 MLJ 204 [1996] 4 MLJ 567 [2002] 2 CLJ 1 [2006] 2 MLJ 293 [2012] 2 MLJ 713 [2020] 6 MLJ 168 [2021] 2 MLJ 60