CARIMIN ENGINEERING SERVICES SDN BHD v DYNAMIC NAVIGATION SDN BHD

wa-24ncc-359-07-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 24 October 2024 • WA-24NCC-359-07/2024 • 25 min read

9 cases cited (0 SG, 9 foreign)

Outcome

Having carefully weighed all the circumstances, including the risk of irreparable damage to the Plaintiff's reputation and business operations if a winding-up petition is allowed to be presented, I am satisfied that the balance of convenience lies firmly in favor of granting the injunctive relief sought. Accordingly, I allow Enclosure 1 and grant orders in terms with costs of RM8,000 for the Plaintiff.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (wa-24ncc-359-07-2024). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Injunction – 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 COMPANY LAW: Winding-up – Statutory demand – Disputed debt – Whether statutory notice amounts to abuse where issued for debt subject to pending civil proceedings – Whether existence of arbitration clause and stay application affects statutory demand – Whether parallel proceedings create multiplicity and risk of inconsistent findings ARBITRATION: Stay of proceedings – Arbitration clause – Effect of mandatory stay provisions under section 10 Arbitration Act 2005 – Whether winding-up proceedings can proceed despite pending stay application – Whether winding-up notice undermines pending arbitration agreement

Practice Areas

Company Law Arbitration Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad Delivered

Counsel (4)

Lope Maizura Firm Rabinder Budiman & Associates Firm Nurul Fatihah Counsel Defendant Wong Chee Wing Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

CARIMIN ENGINEERING SERVICES Sdn Bhd Applicant DYNAMIC NAVIGATION Sdn Bhd Respondent

Statutes Cited

Arbitration Act 2005 (Cap 646)

Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)

Rules of Court 2012

Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)

Cases Cited (9)

UK (1)

[1964] 2 All ER 332

MY (8)

[1998] 2 CLJ 340 [2007] 2 CLJ 305 [2008] 1 CLJ 651 [2016] 9 CLJ 1 [2017] MLJU 906 [2019] MLJU 477 [2024] 5 CLJ 1015 [2024] 8 CLJ 21

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-24ncc-359-07-2024)