The Court of Appeal issued its grounds of judgment dated 20 August 2019 for GJH Avenue Sdn Bhd v Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah & 2 Others. The case has essentially decided that the Tribunal of Homebuyer Claims should have applied the plain language of the Schedule G format of sale and purchase agreements under the Housing Development laws. Delivery of vacant possession is to be calculated from the date of the agreement and not from the date of the payment of the booking fee.
The Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM, being the Malay abbreviation) maintains a useful FAQ page on the Companies Act 2016 (CA 2016) and other transitional issues. This page is updated from time to time. The FAQ is stated as being for general reference. The document does not have legal force. The issues and answers may ultimately have to be tested in the courts.
I touch on two recent updates as at 7 August 2019 dealing with voting on preference shares and meetings of a single-member public company.
The High Court in its grounds of judgment dated 5 August 2019 in the case of United Renewable Energy Co Ltd v TS Solartech Sdn Bhd. This is the first Malaysian decision to recognise the doctrine of universal succession. The Court gave effect to the transmission of shares by operation of law where there has been a foreign merger. This is a matter where I successfully acted for the applicant company.
The High Court granted a declaration that the foreign merger of the Taiwanese companies in question had carried into effect a transmission of shares held in a Malaysian company by operation of law. Further, the High Court allowed a rectification of the register of members of the Malaysian company to reflect the name of the successor entity.
The High Court issued its grounds of judgment dated 18 July 2019 in the case of Perwaja Steel Sdn Bhd (in receivership) v RHB Bank Berhad & 789 Others. Justice Darryl Goon delivered the decision.
The main issue was whether wages under section 31 of the Employment Act 1955 (Employment Act) would have priority over the debts owed to the debenture holder.
The Federal Court in its grounds of judgment dated 1 August 2019 in Martego Sdn Bhd v Arkitek Meor & Chew Sdn Bhd decided on important points of law on adjudication and final payments under a construction contract. The Federal Court had to decide whether the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA) could apply. Further, it was also determined whether CIPAA could apply to payment disputes between an architect and client. The grounds of judgment were written by Justice Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJ.