The High Court in the case of Re Sentoria Bina Sdn Bhd (grounds of judgment dated 9 July 2021) dealt with scheme of arrangement issues. First, that a restraining order could extend to the corporate guarantor of the applicant’s company. Second, the case dealt with the principles for sanction of a scheme of arrangement.
The Court of Appeal in Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad v Mohd Afrizan bin Husain (grounds of judgment dated 2 July 2021) ruled that once a winding up order was made against a public listed company, Bursa Malaysia must de-list that company from the stock exchange.
The case dealt with interesting issues between the interplay of a liquidator’s role under the Companies Act and where the liquidated company is also subject to Bursa Malaysia’s Listing Requirement.
The Federal Court has granted leave to appeal against this Court of Appeal decision.
Wong Li Qi writes a case update on a recent Singapore Court of Appeal decision granting retrospective leave for lifting of the Riddick undertaking.
The Singapore Court of Appeal in Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa  SGCA 63 clarified the legal framework on a Riddick undertaking and discussed the relevant considerations in whether to lift the undertaking. In light of the exceptional circumstances, the Court of Appeal had granted the appellant retrospective leave.
While this decision dealt with other facts, this case update focuses only on the key facts and issues on the Riddick undertaking.
The High Court in Dato’ Shun Leong Kwong & Anor v Menang Corporation (M) Bhd & Ors  MLJU 870 (grounds of judgment dated 21 May 2021) dealt with, among others, the issue of whether the company could suspend its directors. The Court also addressed issues relating to Board meetings and the requisition of the members’ meeting.
The High Court in Chuah Seong Keat and 3 others v Din Tan Yong Chia and 21 others, or otherwise referred to as the Thai Odyssey case, allowed the striking out of certain reliefs from a shareholder oppression action. The Court found that those reliefs were claims under trademarks and domain name and fell outside the oppression relief. You can access the full Grounds of Judgment dated 12 May 2021.
In the High Court decision of Bank Muamalat Malaysia Berhad v Prolink Marketing Sdn Bhd & 2 others  1 LNS 702, the Court held that Bank Negara’s Small Debt Resolution Scheme (SDRS) merely provided advice to a bank to observe a standstill in legal proceedings against distressed borrowers. It was not mandatory for the bank to halt legal proceedings.