Sreenevasan Young > Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > Firm Profile

Client testimonials

CLIENT: Sharonjit Kaur
COMPANY/FIRM: Individual client
TESTIMONIAL: Mark and Talitha are amazing, effective, reliable, insightful and outstanding lawyers.  They helped me navigate and resolve two difficult cases with the best possible outcome.  My interests were always protected. They’ve exceeded all my expectations. They are professional, prompt and thorough. You want to have Mark on your side, and not on the other. I would highly recommend Mark and Sreenevasan Young to represent your best interests.

CLIENT: Mudajaya Corporation Berhad, Tilagavathai a/p Subramaniam (Legal Counsel)
COMPANY/FIRM: Mudajaya Corporation berhad
TESTIMONIAL: Mark and his team at Sreenevasan Young are extremely reliable, robust, proactive and impeccable professionals, responding to queries and meeting deadlines promptly and efficiently. Thorough and precise in diagnosing legal challenges and solutions in a complex case involving misappropriation of funds. Mark is very hands-on, tenacious and direct. Above all, he is practical and commercially savvy.  I rate Mark and Sreenevasan Young highly.

CLIENT: Lim Su Choo, Jenny
COMPANY/FIRM: Individual client
TESTIMONIAL: Mark showed the qualities that convinced me I came to the right law firm. He was reassuring, calm and confident and was ever willing to go the extra mile to ensure that I felt the same.

Throughout the course of our case, Mark provided me with consistently responsive service and has shown great commercial awareness and understanding of the advertising industry. He is pragmatic in finding solutions and is results-oriented. His expertise and experience show when it matters most.

I am extremely impressed with the service provided by Mark and his team. Mark and Sreenevasan Young are highly recommended.

CLIENT: Maybank Trustees Berhad, Chong Kin Tuck (Chief Executive Officer)
COMPANY/FIRM: Maybank Trustees Berhad
TESTIMONIAL: Our work with Mark and his team at Sreenevasan Young aimed to defend the claim by an investment merchant bank for the sum of RM13million (“the Claim”). After 6 years of litigation, we were happy when Mark and his team’s defence strategy resulted in the Court dismissing the Claim with costs. That met our expectations in terms of effective defence work and strategic advice which accomplished our goal.

What we appreciated most about working with Mark and his team was the ability to cut through the web of facts with pragmatism, and deliver the results and then some.

Notable cases

1. Acted for a public listed company to recover the sum of RM301 million. The dispute concerned whether a contract can be varied by oral collateral agreements, whether the contract was a related party transaction and consequently void under the Companies Act, including issues on the breach of warranty of authority and the statute of limitations. We successfully obtained judgment in the High Court. It is pending appeal.
2. Acted as counsel for the plaintiff to recover his investment of RM5.5 million in a failed joint venture project. Successfully obtained an interim order to freeze the defendant’s assets up to the value of the investment plus interest pending judgment plus summary judgment in spite of allegations of duress, coercion, undue influence and fraud.
3. Defended a solicitor in a failed property transaction concerning allegations of fraud, forgery, deceit, misrepresentation, conspiracy to defraud and negligence with a claim for damages in excess of RM100 million. After mediation and negotiations, the dispute was amicably resolved without any admission of liability.
4. Defended a sub-contractor against a claim by its main contractor for recovery of contractual liquidated damages imposed by the employer on the main contractor, notwithstanding the absence of such clause as between the main contractor and sub-contractor. The main contractor’s claim was allowed in part by the High Court, but was reversed on appeal by the Court of Appeal.
5. Acted for a purchaser in a case for specific performance against the executrix of a deceased co-proprietor. The agreement contained a stipulation for the executrix to obtain “the necessary court order for the sale”. The High Court found in favour of the client holding that that stipulation of was legally unnecessary as the Will of the deceased did not impose any restrictions on the powers of sale of the executrix.
6. Acted for a client in a dispute over the supply and installation of network infrastructure and facilities for contract in excess of RM200 million. The High Court ruled in favour of the client, and the decision was upheld by both the Court of Appeal and Federal Court, with proceedings to assess damages now on foot before the High Court.
7. Acted for the Defendants in successfully striking-out a claim in the High Court for RM230 million based on fraud, the non-est factum doctrine and s 29 of the Limitation Act 1953. The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
8. Acted for a public listed company in successfully defending a claim, after trial in High Court, for the sum of RM10.6 million based on fraud, constructive trust and the statute of limitations.