Jeyakumar Palakrishnar

On the court record

Jeyakumar Palakrishnar appears in the corpus as a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) commercial litigator, with reported matters concentrated on the funding of litigation and on the impeachment of consent orders for fraud. In one matter, appearing for the defendant, the application concerned security for costs under Order 23 rules 1(1) and 1(2A) of the Rules of Court 2012, where a nominal plaintiff sued in a representative capacity as executor and a non-party was said to be contributing to the plaintiff's costs in return for a share of any recovery; the court had to consider whether an executor suing in a representative capacity was exempt from security for costs, whether delay in filing weighed against the application, whether the funding arrangement amounted to champerty and maintenance, and whether the quantum should be reduced so as not to stifle the litigation. Two further matters, appearing for the defendant in one and the plaintiff in the other, concerned the impeachment of a consent order said to have been procured by the conscious and deliberate concealment of material facts. The questions were whether setting aside a judgment on the ground of fraud requires proof of conscious and deliberate dishonesty rather than constructive fraud or mere unconscionability, whether the concealed facts must be material in the sense that their disclosure would have fundamentally altered how the court approached and decided the matter, whether a party who personally approved and benefited from the impugned transactions could conceal that involvement and then challenge those same transactions, and what significance attached to a consent order entered bilaterally between an applicant and a statutory body without the participation of affected parties. Across the appearances the practice is that of a commercial litigator engaged with the costs and funding architecture of litigation and with the exacting standard required to unwind a consent order for fraud.