N
NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd
Organisation 4 cases
About NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd
NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd appears as a party in 4 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning June 2019 to September 2025. NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd appeared as respondent in 2 cases, appellant in 1 case, plaintiff in 1 case. Cases span the High Court (2), Court of Appeal (1), Federal Court (1).
How many court cases involve NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd?
NAUTILUS TUG & TOWAGE Sdn Bhd appears in 4 published judgments from June 2019 to September 2025. Most commonly as respondent (2 cases).
Practice Areas
Civil Procedure 1 This appeal raises two novel questions, namely: (1) if two inferences are equally open to the court from the same set of facts and these inferences do not concern the credibility of a witness, is there a rule that the court should accept the non-sinister inference and reject the sinister inference (Non-Sinister Inference Rule)?; and (2) with regard to the tort of conspiracy to injure a claimant by unlawful means, whether Malaysian courts should substitute the requirement of actual knowledge regarding the unlawful means on the part of the conspirators and accept a lower threshold of “constructive intent” as laid down by the apex courts in Canada and the United Kingdom (UK) as follows 1 Striking out 1 Withdraw application 1 Struck out 1 removal as a director is not valid if it was not on the agenda in the notice of a board of directors meeting-a breach of natural justice-such an important issue must be put on the agenda for the meeting-defendant had breached natural justice by failing to place the issue of the plaintiff purported breach of articles 72(g) and (h) on the BOD meeting agenda so that the plaintiff is notified of the action to declare his removal as a director so that he can be given an opportunity to defend himself-the director should have been given notice of the matter by placing it on the agenda and issued an injunction to restrain the Board from excluding him from any board meeting-The board of directors cannot decide on a matter not stated in the agenda-unless the articles of a company provide to the contrary, no meeting of a board is valid unless reasonable notice of it, and the relevant agenda that is to be discussed at it, is given to the directors-where the purpose of a meeting is expressly stated, the meeting will be limited to addressing the specified business. The meeting cannot decide on matters not on the agenda-two board meetings were not valid because each board meeting was convened for a specified purpose, yet the resolutions purportedly passed at each meeting were unrelated to that specified purpose- 1