Steven Thiru

On the court record

Steven Thiru is a Malaysian firm whose reported matters before the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) span company, constitutional, contract and arbitration litigation. In the corporate field it has appeared in a statutory derivative action, addressing an application for leave to commence proceedings on behalf of a company under section 348 of the Companies Act 2016, the standing of a former director as complainant, compliance with the notice requirement in section 348(2), good faith, collateral purpose and an honest belief in the cause of action. It has also appeared, in the same high-profile judicial review as concerns the Bar, challenging the Attorney General's exercise of prosecutorial discretion under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution and a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

The firm's commercial and arbitration practice is substantial. It has litigated a claim by an electricity licensee for arrears of electricity charges and a late-payment surcharge under the electricity-supply legislation, a tenancy dispute over whether a tenancy had been renewed by conduct and whether double rental was payable where vacant possession had not been delivered to the landlord's satisfaction, and a trial founded on fraud and breach of fiduciary duty by a deceased managing director who had controlled a company. In the arbitration field it has appeared in a challenge to a tribunal's jurisdiction and admissibility, including whether the tribunal's decision to bifurcate proceedings and determine jurisdiction first was within its powers under section 26 of the Arbitration Act.

In the fiduciary-duty trial the firm engaged the conduct of a deceased managing director who had controlled the company's management and finances, and the effect of that control on the shareholding and the claims founded on breach of fiduciary duty. The reported profile is that of a commercial and public-law litigation practice engaged with derivative actions and directors' conduct, constitutional review of prosecutorial discretion, contract and tenancy disputes, and arbitral jurisdiction, with a consistent focus on standing, good faith and the proper limits of power.