Lee Hishamuddin Allen & Gledhill

On the court record

This entity, recorded in the corpus as Lee Hishamuddin Allen & Gledhill, appears in the reported judgments as a commercial and insolvency-litigation practice, working mainly in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) with matters in the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) and appearing most often for defendants and respondents. Tort is a recurring theme, and a significant matter concerns professional negligence — the liability of a statutory auditor to third-party investors and the duty of care owed in that context, in litigation involving an international accounting firm. Its insolvency and company work is substantial, including a scheme of arrangement under sections 366 and 368 of the Companies Act 2016, with orders to convene the scheme meetings in a matter involving a listed engineering group and an intervening creditor, an appeal by foreign investors pursuing claims against a Malaysian company wound up in the aftermath of the 1997–1998 financial crisis, and a bankruptcy matter turning on the validity of the proceedings and the change of a creditor's name. The firm also appears in civil procedure, including an application to set aside a perfected consent judgment in a matter involving a water-utility company and a company in liquidation, and in a dispute over the contractual nature of the relationship between an association and its members. Questions of statutory duty and whether a statute confers a private right of action also feature, as does a stay of execution of a money judgment. The counterparties in the corpus include accounting, engineering and utility companies and foreign investors. Acting predominantly for defendants and respondents, the firm presents as a litigator whose corpus centres on professional-negligence, scheme-of-arrangement and insolvency disputes, together with the civil-procedure and statutory-duty questions that surround complex commercial and corporate-rescue litigation. The auditor-negligence matter is a particularly significant one, since the extent of an auditor's liability to investors who are not its client, but who rely on audited accounts, tests the reach of the duty of care into the wider financial market. The scheme-of-arrangement work, by contrast, engages the constructive machinery by which a company compromises its obligations with creditors or members under court supervision.