Joint venturers owe a fiduciary duty to each other
In Eastern Properties Sdn Bhd v Hampstead Corporation Sdn Bhd [2008] 1 AMR 285, the Court of Appeal held that joint venturers owe a fiduciary duty to each other: just as partners do.
*Abbreviations HC = high court COA = court of appeal FC = federal court Ngu Toh Tung & 7 Ors v Superintendent of Lands & Survey, Kuching Division, Kuching & Anor [COA] administrative law; land acquisition J & C New Poly Catering Sdn Bhd v TTMP Bakun Consortium Sdn Bhd [HC] The general rule is that a high court will not issue an injunction to restrain the execution of another high court order. However, the high court possesses inherent jurisdiction to do justice in each case. Thus, an interim injunction could be issued to restrain execution of a decree if it could be shown that the execution would result in an injury to the party against whom the execution was directed at. As a matter of practice, applications for a garnishee order are made before the sar or dr and the decision is appealable to a judge in chambers. Even though under the rules of the high court 1980, service of originating process or other court documents on a corporation...
In LSSC Development Sdn Bhd v Thomas Iruthayam & Anor [2007] 2 CLJ 434, the Court of Appeal held that where purchasers were given a defective house out of time by the developer, for the defects, that was something for which they were entitled to be compensated. As for the delay in delivery, the contract itself contained a clause which provided the formula for the compensation that the developer must pay for its lateness. This was the clause to which the purchasers have recourse as it created a contractual obligation to pay a single sum by way of liquidated damages for the period during which they were kept out of the building for which they had already paid, such sum being calculated upon the basis set out in the sale and purchase agreement.
Wu Siew Ying (t/a Fuh Lin Bud-Grafting Centre) v Gunung Tunggal Quarry & Construction Sdn Bhd & 2 Ors [2008] 1 AMR 496 [COA] It has been a generally accepted principle that amendments to pleadings can be made at any stage of the proceeding before the pronouncement of the decision. Therefore, it was not unlawful for the third defendant to apply for the amendment at this late stage even after the submission of parties had been made. Dato' Seri Dr Kok Mew Soon & 3 Ors v Mustapha bin Mohamed & 2 Ors [2008] 1 AMR 537 [HC] Pursuant to Section 72(a) of the Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad Act, 1998 and the relevant authorities, the court is prohibited from granting an injunction order against Danaharta as a corporation. As receivers and managers, the 1st and 2nd respondents could be equated as special administrators as they were appointed by Danaharta as their agents and acting pursuant to their power as provided under the Danaharta Act. As such, they were prote...