Today, the Court of Appeal dismissed Scomi Group Bhd’s appeal against the High Court decision dismissing its judicial management application.
As set out earlier, the High Court had ruled on two points when dismissing the judicial management application of Scomi Group Bhd, being a listed company. Continue reading
The High Court in Small Medium Enterprise Development Bank Malaysia Berhad v Oren Venture Sdn Bhd and 3 others (grounds of judgment dated 4 March 2022) decided on the liquidator granting sanction for legal proceedings.
The crucial issue before the Court was whether a liquidator of a wound-up company can issue a sanction, or delegate to another person, the liquidator’s power to bring or defend any action or other legal proceedings in the name and on behalf of the company.
Nathalie Ker writes an update on the Federal Court decision on the duties of a liquidator of a listed company.
The Federal Court has now issued its grounds of judgment (dated 31 March 2022) allowing the appeal of Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad (Bursa) in Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad v Mohd Afrizan bin Husain (Appeal No.: 02(f)-39-07/2021(W)). The grounds of judgment may be found here. The Federal Court reversed the earlier Court of Appeal decision.
The Court addressed two main issues. First, whether Bursa was obliged to immediately delist a listed company upon the company being served with a winding up order (pursuant to Rule 16.11(2) of the ACE Market Listing Requirements (AMLR)). Second, the duty of a liquidator as the person in control of the management of a listed corporation to ensure compliance with the Listing Requirements. Continue reading
This update is further to the earlier High Court decision in Re Scomi Group Bhd which held that public listed companies cannot apply for judicial management.
Another public listed company, Dolomite Corporation Berhad, has also failed in its judicial management application.
On 8 March 2022, Dolomite announced that the Shah Alam High Court had dismissed its judicial management application. Among others, the Court held that public listed companies are not allowed to apply for judicial management pursuant to section 403(b) of the Companies Act 2016 i.e. being a company subject to the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007. Continue reading
The High Court in Asiabio Capital Sdn Bhd v Seacera Group Bhd [2021] MLJU 2598 (grounds of judgment dated 3 November 2021) has emphasised the mandatory pre-conditions for the grant of a restraining order in a scheme of arrangement.
This short decision touches on the importance of showing that the proposed scheme of arrangement must involve more than half of the total debts of the debtor company.
Pang Huey Lynn writes about this novel decision where a party filed a suit against a judicial manager.
The High Court in the case of Demeter O&G Supplies Sdn Bhd v Datuk Stephen Duar Tuan Kiat (as judicial manager of Scomi Oiltools Sdn Bhd and Scomi KMC Sdn Bhd) (grounds of judgment dated 30 November 2021) allowed the judicial manager’s application to strike out the civil suit filed against him.
One of the key issues was whether a party could file a suit against a judicial manager without first obtaining permission from the judicial management court.
