Methani v Perianayagam

JurisdictionMalaysia
Year1961
CourtHigh Court (Malaysia)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
5 cases
  • Kandasami; Mohamed Mustafa
    • Malaysia
    • Federal Court (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • Ritzland Investment Pte Ltd v Grace Management & Consultancy Services Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 7 April 2014
    ...Sdn Bhd [1982] 1 MLJ 198 (folld) Maresse Collections Inc v Trademart Singapore Pte Ltd [1999] SGHC 123 (folld) Methani v Perianayagam [1961] 1 MLJ 5 (refd) National Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1981] AC 675 (folld) Protax Co-operative Society Ltd v Toh Teng Seng [2001] SGHC 84 (......
  • Ritzland Investment Pte Ltd v Grace Management & Consultancy Services Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 7 April 2014
    ...is bilateral: applying both to the landlord and the tenant. Wee Chong Jin J put the doctrine in this way in Methani v Perianayagam [1961] 1 MLJ 5, relying on English common law: The doctrine is that a tenant may not question his landlord`s title and, conversely, that a landlord having by hi......
  • Chiap Seng Productions Pte Ltd v Newspaper Seng Logistics Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 22 August 2022
    ...applying both to the landlord and the tenant. Wee Chong Jin J (as he then was) put the doctrine in this way in Methani v Perianayagam[1961] 1 MLJ 5, relying on English common law: The doctrine is that a tenant may not question his landlord's title and, conversely, that a landlord having by ......
  • Get Started for Free