Zahir Jeya & Zainal

On the court record

Zahir Jeya & Zainal is a Malaysian firm whose reported matters before the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) are concentrated in insolvency, fraud, land and civil-procedure litigation. In the insolvency field it has appeared in bankruptcy proceedings on appeal concerning an application to set aside a bankruptcy notice and leave to commence bankruptcy proceedings against a guarantor, and specifically whether the prior leave of the court is required before a bankruptcy notice may issue, and in a matter on the validity of bankruptcy proceedings following a change of the creditor's name, whether leave is required for a mere change of name under the Rules of Court 2012, and the operation of a voluntary arrangement and interim order under the Insolvency Act 1967, including whether an interim order may be extended after ninety days.

A recurring theme is fraud and the impeachment of judgments. The firm has litigated the impeachment of a consent order said to have been procured by the conscious and deliberate concealment of material facts, engaging whether the test for fraud requires proof of conscious and deliberate dishonesty or whether constructive fraud or mere unconscionability suffices. In the land field it has appeared in an ownership dispute engaging whether an administrator's rights could be defeated by a purported sale of land, the authenticity of documents, and sections 340 and 344 of the National Land Code.

The firm's civil-procedure work includes an application for security for costs under Order 23 of the Rules of Court 2012, where a nominal plaintiff sued for the benefit of another and a non-party contributed to the costs in return for a share of any recovery, and whether a plaintiff suing in a representative capacity as executor was exempt. The reported profile is that of an insolvency and civil-litigation practice engaged with bankruptcy and voluntary arrangements, the impeachment of judgments for fraud, land ownership and indefeasibility, and the security-for-costs questions that arise in funded litigation.