KARUNAKARAN A/L CHATU v 1. ) PUVENENTHIRAN A/L GUNNASEKARAN 2. ) AZIZUL ANNUAR DATUK PATINGGI TAN SRI ADENAN SATEM 3. ) TAN SRI DATO' SRI (DR) MOHAMAD NORZA ZAKARIA

Case Significance

Illustrates the enforcement of a sports body's internal dispute-resolution machinery, holding an improperly convened extraordinary general meeting unconstitutional and compelling a national association and the Olympic Council to mediate a dispute with a state affiliate through an independent mediator under the relevant constitutions and the Sports Development Act 1997.

This High Court decision concerns a governance dispute within organised sport, and whether a national sports body and the Olympic Council may be compelled to mediate a dispute between a national association and its state affiliate. The plaintiff, suing as president of the state taekwondo association, sought interlocutory and final relief against the president of an affiliated club, the president of the national taekwondo body and the president of the Olympic Council of Malaysia. The court had granted, and then extended, an ex parte injunction preserving the status quo of the office-bearers of the state association and restraining the implementation of resolutions passed at an extraordinary general meeting. In the substantive originating summons the plaintiff sought to restrain the giving of effect to those resolutions and to compel the national body and the Olympic Council to commence mediation of the underlying dispute under the dispute-resolution clauses of the relevant constitutions, read with the framework governing sports bodies under the Sports Development Act 1997. The court examined whether the extraordinary general meeting had been validly convened, whether the dispute was subject to mediation through the association's domestic remedies, and whether the Olympic Council had jurisdiction to mediate a dispute between a national association and its affiliate. It held that the plaintiff had established its case on the balance of probabilities, that the extraordinary general meeting had been unconstitutional, procedurally improper and in direct contravention of the state association's constitution, and that the national body and the Olympic Council should be compelled to mediate the dispute through an independent mediator appointed by the Asian International Arbitration Centre within 30 days, in accordance with the dispute-resolution clauses. It allowed the relief sought, with costs against the respondents. The judgment is a useful illustration of the enforcement of a sports body's internal dispute-resolution machinery and of the court's willingness to compel mediation and to set aside an improperly convened general meeting.