Oct 29 hearing for Zico’s bid to suspend decision siding with Zaid Ibrahim

KUALA LUMPUR – An application by Zaid Ibrahim & Co (Zico) to suspend the high court’s decision allowing former minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim to obtain documents from the legal firm relating to his suit against it will be heard at the high court here on October 29.

Zaid as the plaintiff filed the originating suit on December 18 last year, naming Singapore company Zico Holdings Inc managing director Chew Seng Kok, the legal firm’s executive director Datuk Seri Nik Norzrul Thani Nik Hassan Thani, and Zico as the first to third defendants.

Counsel Mervyn Lai, representing all three defendants, told Bernama that the court ordered Zaid and the defendants to file their written arguments by October 8, and the submission of the counterargument by October 15.

Case management today was conducted online before high court deputy registrar Maslinda Selamat. Counsel Romario Jonoi appeared for Zaid.

Based on the application notice, filed by the defendants on May 18, they are seeking for the May 10 decision to be suspended until the end of the hearing and the disposal of their appeal at the Court of Appeal on the decision.

Zaid, in his originating suit, said around 2014, the defendants launched an exercise to exploit the brand “Zico” by setting up a separate firm incorporated in Singapore, known as Zico Holdings Inc, which acquired important operating divisions for the firm for a consideration in which the first defendant became the largest shareholder in Zico Holdings Inc.

He said in the incorporation of Zico Holdings Inc as a company around 2014, the first defendant entered into an agreement to transfer 10% interest rights in the shares of Zico Holdings Inc to the plaintiff in return for deducting the outstanding balance of payments to the plaintiff for the transfer of the equity shares of the firm that were transferred in 2008.

After the transfer of equity shares in 2004 and 2008, he said, he retained 5% equity shares in the firm, and yet, the shares remain unpaid and he never received any report or profit for the shares.

He is requesting that the defendants disclose the documents required by him to make his claim based on the causes of action in the contract, tort and breach of trust against the defendants, and is seeking the appropriate remedies, such as a perpetual injunction to prevent the firm from continuing to use its name as a practice name, as well as other relief. – Bernama, September 3, 2021