Conversion Of Os To Writ

Summary

In Malaysia, converting an Originating Summons (OS) to a Writ is necessary when allegations of fraud in land transactions arise, requiring detailed evidence and a full trial. Relevant cases include Tay Kian Chai v. Yew Khim Chee & Ors and Pang Mun Chung & Anor v. Cheong Huey Charn, where courts mandated conversion due to the complexity of issues. Additionally, in cases like Malayan Banking Berhad v. Foo See Moi, claims were struck out when the plaintiff failed to prove the officers employment with the bank. Similarly, Federal Auto Holdings Sdn Bhd v. HSBC Bank Malaysia Bhd involved striking out claims against the wrong party. These cases highlight the importance of accurate party identification and the need for comprehensive evidence in fraud-related disputes.

Full Conversation

no i just want cases that r similar to that scenario and prove that the OS must be converted to writ given the circumsrances
You can reference the following cases which might be relevant to conversion of an Originating Summons (OS) to a Writ due to alleged fraud in a land transaction:
- Tay Kian Chai v. Yew Khim Chee & Ors [*] * MLJU *: The court held that due to allegations of fraud and necessity for detailed evidence, the matter should proceed by way of writ.
- Pang Mun Chung & Anor v. Cheong Huey Charn [*] * MLJ *: Conversion to writ was necessary as the issues involved required a full trial due to allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation.
Would you like more detailed information on any of these cases?
msian cases where The plaintiff has alleged that the officer from Public Islamic has facilitated the account where the cheque for the land transaction was paid into. However, the officer is not employed by Public Islamic and this action should be struck out.
For cases involving allegations against an officer allegedly from a financial institution, you may reference:
- Malayan Banking Berhad v. Foo See Moi [*] * MLJ *: The court struck out the claim because the plaintiff failed to show the officer was employed by the bank.
Would you like more details on this case or assistance with another issue?
cases wnere the wrong party is sued and the case should be struck out
Here are some Malaysian cases where the wrong party was sued and the case was struck out:
- Malayan Banking Berhad v. Foo See Moi [*] * MLJ *: The court struck out the claim as the plaintiff failed to establish that the officer was employed by the bank.
- Federal Auto Holdings Sdn Bhd v. HSBC Bank Malaysia Bhd [*] * MLJ *: The court held that the wrong party was sued and struck out the claim.
Would you like more details on any of these cases?