Christopher Lee & Ong

On the court record

Christopher Lee & Ong appears in the reported judgments as a commercial and construction-litigation practice, working entirely in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and acting most often for defendants. Contract is a central theme, argued across a range of doctrines: the construction and performance of a distributorship agreement and the status of an independent distributor, quantum meruit and unjust enrichment under section 71 of the Contracts Act 1950, the doctrine of privity and quasi-contract, and promissory estoppel and its requirement of a clear and unequivocal representation. Construction-payment adjudication under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA) features prominently, including questions going to the core jurisdiction of an adjudicator. A distinct company-law strand concerns the Fortuna injunction, which restrains the presentation or continuation of a winding-up petition where the debt is disputed or where an adjudicated debt under CIPAA is said to remain payable, in matters involving technology and construction companies. Its civil-procedure work is notable for the strict specificity required when pleading fraud under Order 18 rule 12 of the Rules of Court 2012, the striking out of pleadings under Order 18 rule 19, and summary disposal under Order 14A, including a matter involving United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd. It also appears in judicial review of decisions by the customs authority and the Minister of Finance. The counterparties in the corpus are substantial corporates, including Petronas Dagangan Berhad, Siemens Malaysia Sdn Bhd and Pestech-group companies. Acting predominantly on the defence side, the firm presents as a litigator strong in contract, construction adjudication and the company and procedural disputes — Fortuna injunctions, pleading-fraud specificity and summary disposal — that surround commercial claims. Its contract work is notable for the range of restitutionary and equitable doctrines it engages, so that a single dispute may raise quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, privity and estoppel in the alternative. The Fortuna injunction matters place the firm at the intersection of construction payment and company insolvency, where a party seeks to restrain a winding-up petition founded on a debt it disputes, and its judicial-review appearances against the customs authority and the Minister of Finance add a public-law dimension to an otherwise commercial practice.