Joyce Lim

AirAsia X Restructuring: Scheme is an Insolvency-Related Event under Cape Town Convention

The Malaysian LawyerLeave a comment

Kwan Will Sen and Joyce Lim write about the recent judgment involving AirAsia X’s restructuring and its significance under the Cape Town Convention.

Quick Take

The Malaysian High Court in Kuala Lumpur had on 19 February 2021 handed down a significant judgment (click here for the grounds of judgment) in relation to AirAsia X Berhad (“AAX”)’s application for leave to convene creditors’ meeting for purposes of considering and approving a scheme of arrangement (“Leave Application”).

It analysed and interpreted certain provisions under the Convention on the International Interests in Mobile Equipment (“the Convention”) and the Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Aircraft Equipment (“the Protocol”), in particular that of Article XI(10) of the Protocol. Continue reading →

Case Update: High Court Distinguishes Between Personal Wrong and Corporate Wrong in Shareholder Oppression

The Malaysian LawyerLeave a comment

Joyce Lim writes a case update on this High Court decision on the importance between a personal wrong and a corporate wrong in a shareholder oppression action.

The High Court in the recent case of Dato’ Shabaruddin Bin Ibrahim v Dato’ Ruslan Bin Ali Omar & Ors [2020] MLJU 1744 (with grounds of judgment dated 26 October 2020) (Shabaruddin) dealt with the distinction between a personal wrong committed against shareholders of a company and a corporate wrong committed against the company. Continue reading →

Case Update: Board Meeting Notice Need Not Contain Full Details of the Business of the Meeting

The Malaysian LawyerLeave a comment

Joyce Lim writes an update on a High Court decision on how the notice of a Board meeting need not contain the particulars of the business to be transacted at that meeting

The High Court in the recent case of Rozilawati binti Haji Basir v Nationwide Express Holdings Berhad & Ors [2020] MLJU 1198 (see the grounds of judgment dated 18 August 2020) dealt with two issues relating to the Board meeting requirements for companies.

Continue reading →

Company Law Case Update: Oppression Remedy in Quasi-Partnerships

The Malaysian LawyerLeave a comment

Joyce Lim writes on a recent High Court decision on the oppression remedy in quasi-partnerships. Further, the decision confirms that oppression can arise from breaches of a shareholders’ agreement.

The High Court in the recent case of ISM Sendirian Berhad v Queensway Nominees (Asing) Sdn Bhd & Ors and other suits [2020] MLJU 388 dealt with an oppression claim by a minority shareholder in quasi-partnerships (also known as Ebrahimi-type companies).

Continue reading →

Shareholder Oppression: A Personal Wrong or a Corporate Wrong?

Lee ShihLeave a comment

Lee Shih and Joyce Lim discuss the effect of the Singapore Court of Appeal’s decision in the Sakae Holdings case. This article was originally published in Skrine’s Legal Insights Issue 03/2018.

In the recent case of Ho Yew Kong v Sakae Holdings Ltd [2018] SGCA 33 (“Sakae Holdings”), the Singapore Court of Appeal had the opportunity to clarify the distinction between personal wrongs committed against shareholders of a company and corporate wrongs against the company. This distinction directly relates to the question of whether the appropriate relief in each respective scenario would be by way of an oppression action or a statutory derivative action.

ST Photo. Image from the Business Times Singapore.

The Singapore Court of Appeal set out a framework to determine whether an aggrieved shareholder could maintain an oppression action or ought to have pursued a statutory derivative action instead. Continue reading →