JCW

Justin was the counsel for Wong Yu Ke. This is a case on claiming vacant possession by Wong Yu Ke against alleged licensee and interpretation of Section 41 of the Specific Relief Act 1950.

Chooi Peng was the counsel for Citibank Berhad. This is a case on striking out the writ and the statement of claim by the appellant that the declaration for sale of the property by the Bank is null and void.

Justin was the counsel for Uniphoenix. This is a case of winding up action by the Bank without a Judgment being struck out in favour of Uniphoenix. The issues that arose were inter-alia (a) whether the winding up proceedings herein constituted an abuse of process and ought to be struck off; (b) whether there were serious disputes raised by the respondent in relation to the whole of the petitioner's claim; and (c) whether the alleged debt was bona fide disputed on substantive grounds.

Justin was the counsel for Kong Siew Kin. This is a case on application to strike out an action in relation to a High Court suit filed to circumvent Session Court proceedings and the issue of duplicity of proceedings amounting to an abuse of process.

Justin was the counsel for Global Destar. In this case, an application was made for judgment on admission for part of the claim pursuant to Order 27 rule 3 of the Rules of the High Court. The principles pursuant to such an application were extensively discussed in this case.

Justin was the counsel for Repco. This is a case on application for an urgent hearing date, interrogatories and case management procedure in a case involving trade secrets/confidential information between the employer and employees.

ustin was the counsel for Universiti Malaya (“UM”) in relation to land acquisition of the land owned by UM which was subject to compulsory acquisition. This is one of the few reported cases where the Land Acquisition Court proceedings is not just between the (previous) landowner (who is interested to increase the market value of the subject land) and the Land Administrator but also involves the agency applying for the acquisition (who is interested to reduce the market value of the subject land). The Court in this case amongst others held that the hearing at the High Court is an original hearing and the decision of the Land Administrator at the enquiry is an administrative decision.

Justin was the counsel for 4th & 5th defendants. In this case, Justin successfully extricated the 4th & 5th defendants from the suit at the Registrar level. The plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal but did not serve it and adjourned the Appeal until much later. The Appeal was dismissed by the Court as the failure and delay to serve the notice is in breach of the rules which require service before the first appeal hearing date has prejudiced the 4th & 5th defendants as they thought that they are no longer parties to the suit.