[2008] 1 LNS 717 (CA)
The main issue in this case was that the petition for winding up grounded upon the judgment dated 10.10.2000 which has established a joint liability not only against the Appellant but also against another company. Datuk Ganesan was the counsel for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Respondents. The Court of Appeal held that Parr v. Snell should not be glossed over, resulting in a “technical rule” being applied indiscriminately and Asia Commercial Finance (M) Bhd should not be expanded beyond the facts of the case.