caution to my wife's solicitors not to act without due authorization

I just received a phone call from my wife’s solicitors (name not to be mentioned at this moment) asking to speak to my wife only (what devilment he seeks is not known). Told him to set the 3rd Party action for trial, since this 3rd Party action is inherent in Stephen Lim Cheng Ban’s affidavit dated 17th of September, 2004, my wife's solicitors claim that there is no 3rd party action, as alleged by me and that the Petition is dead since it was struck out by judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali. I disagree !

My wife’ solicitors do not understand that the Petition is separate from the 3rd Party action if a 3 Party action exist “DE FACTO” and Stephen Lim’s affidavit RAISED A de facto 3rd Party action. Stephen Lim’s affidavit claims that my wife sold her ONE SINGLE promoter’s share and 3,000 other share,to Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, but my wife had sworn that she had but the ONE SINGLE PROMOTER’S SHARE, and nothing else. Stephen Lim’s affidavit is a de facto claim against my wife for that one promoter’s share and allegedly 3000 other shares. THIS RAISES A THIRD PARTY CLAIM. The claim is against my wife alone. It can be seen that judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali took this to mean that the “transfers” (minus all the proper documentation like proof OF VALID COMPANY RESOLUTIONS RELATING TO THE ALLEGED TRANSFERS WERE NOT AVAILABLE AS PROOF, no share certificate or share certificates endorsed by my wife were not displayed to prove she was in fact the share holder as they alleged she sold all those shares; all these & more were all absent from Stephen Lim Cheng Ban’s affidavit)as proof of her transfer of her share; A TRANSFER ALONE IS NOT PROOF OF SUCH TRANSFER WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF THE SHARE CERTIFICATE). A transfer without the share certificate transfer NOTHING. To enforce any claim that is merely evidenced by any “transfer form” without the share certificate, the CLAIMANT MUST SUE FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF THE SALE. The transfers were all forgeries, as noted by judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali. The allegedly transfer form allegedly signed by my wife(these were perjuries of such claims) were not accompanied with any share certificate). They are not evidence of the alleged sale; THEY ARE MERE ALLEGATIONS and must be proven, BUT JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD ALI DENIED OUTRIGHT PETITIONER’S APPLICATION TO CROSS EXAMINE.

On my wife’s solicitors claim that there is no de facto 3rd Party claim by Stephen Lim Cheng Ban against my wife and that on the striking out of said Petition, there are no more issues left. I told him that I DISAGREE from his understanding of the issues, because in any 3rd Party action that has come about in the pleading of the contestants, THE MAIN ACTION (SAID PETITION) MAY HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT, BUT THE 3RD PARTY ACTION BEING BETWEEN STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN as Plaintiff AGAINST MY WIFE AS DEFENDANT TO THE 3RD PARTY ACTION will REMAIN TO BE TRIED. The 3rd Party action is a separate cause of action and it has come into existence only in the course of the pleadings, I submit that this 3rd Party action needs to be tried and my wife’s solicitors need to SET IT DOWN FOR TRIAL.

If my wife’s solicitors fail to set this de facto 3rd Party action down for trial then there may be an issue whether my wife’s solicitors had in fact acted COMPETANTLY IN REFUSING TO SET THIS 3RD PARTY ACTION DOWN FOR TRIAL. AT A PROFESSIONAL LEVEL, my wife’s solicitors will have to ask themselves whether their refusal to set the case down for trial will not RAISE a question of professional negligence. I have spoken to him and I had drawn his attention to the issue of Spephen Lim Cheng Ban’s AFFIDAVIT DATED 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2004 and that this affidavit to my mind raises a THIRD PARTY ACTION.

I am publishing my arguments on this blog as evidence that I have adequately cautioned him that his action in not setting this 3rd Party action may be cause for a professional negligence suit if one exist.

I tried and failed to get a fax through to my wife’s solicitors and I will call him on the phone and tell him to read this message NOW. I want him to know that his appeal is a ride to nowhere(discussed in my post below dated this Friday.

yapchongyee