QUESTION 2

Fred Weasley has been appointed administrator of his father’s estate and is awaiting to extract the
grant of letters of administration. His late father had left the sale transaction of one property
uncompleted. The purchaser, Sirius had been Fred’s father’s very good friend and allowed the
payment of the purchase price to be delayed. However, Fred noted that Siruis had made no attempt
to complete the sale even after a year since his father’s death. Fred intended to file a bankruptcy
notice on behalf of his father’s estate against Sirius. Advise Fred?

Issue 1: Obtaining Grant of Letters of Administration

Issue:
Fred Weasley, as the appointed administrator of his late father's estate, awaits the grant of letters of
administration. The issue is whether Fred can obtain the grant to legally act on behalf of the estate.

Law:
Probate and Administration Act 1959
Section 30: Grants the right to the administrator to act on behalf of the estate upon receiving the
letters of administration.
Application:
Fred must ensure that he fulfills the requirements under the Probate and Administration Act 1959 to
obtain the grant of letters of administration. This will authorize him to manage his father's estate,
including addressing the uncompleted property transaction.

Conclusion:
To effectively manage his late father's estate, Fred should prioritize obtaining the grant of letters of
administration in accordance with Section 30 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959. This will
provide him with the legal authority needed to act on behalf of the estate.

Issue 2: Enforceability of Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA)

Issue:
Fred's late father had an incomplete property sale transaction with Sirius, who has not completed the
sale even after a year. The issue is whether Fred can enforce the terms of the SPA against Sirius.

Law:
Contract Law (Sale and Purchase Agreement)
Section 56 of the Contracts Act 1950: Deals with the performance of reciprocal promises, applicable if
the SPA had unfulfilled obligations from both parties.
Application:
Fred should review the terms of the SPA to confirm its enforceability. If the SPA is still valid, Fred can
pursue specific performance or damages against Sirius for breach of contract under Section 56 of the
Contracts Act 1950 and is supported by the case of Low Lee Lian v. Ban Hin Lee Bank Bhd [2019] 3
MLJ 461,

Relevant Case Law:

Low Lee Lian v. Ban Hin Lee Bank Bhd [2019] 3 MLJ 461: Reiterates the requirement for certainty,
undisputedness, and immediate payability of debts in bankruptcy notices.
Conclusion:
Fred should assess the enforceability of the SPA and consider legal actions such as specific
performance or damages if the terms are still valid. This will enable him to address Sirius' failure to
complete the property sale transaction.
Issue 3: Filing Bankruptcy Notice against Sirius
Issue:
Fred intends to file a bankruptcy notice on behalf of his father's estate against Sirius due to the
unpaid debt from the incomplete property sale. The issue is whether Fred can proceed with filing the
bankruptcy notice under Malaysian law.

Law:
Insolvency Act 1967 (as amended by the Insolvency (Amendment) Act 2020)
Section 5(1)(a): Allows a creditor to file a bankruptcy notice if the debtor owes a liquidated sum of at
least RM 50,000.
Section 6: Details the requirements and procedures for serving a bankruptcy notice, including the
necessity for the debt to be certain and undisputed.
Application:
Fred must verify that the debt owed by Sirius exceeds RM 50,000 and is undisputed. He should issue a
notice of demand before filing a bankruptcy notice, following the procedures outlined in Section 6 of
the Insolvency Act 1967. If Sirius fails to respond to the notice, Fred can proceed with filing the
bankruptcy notice.

Relevant Case Law:

Lee Yoke Yam v. Chin Keat Seng [2020] 4 MLJ 339: Highlights the necessity for the creditor to ensure
the debt's validity and amount before filing a bankruptcy notice.
Conclusion:
Fred should follow the procedures outlined in the Insolvency Act 1967 to file a bankruptcy notice
against Sirius, ensuring that the debt meets the requirements and is undisputed. This legal action can
help address Sirius' failure to fulfill the financial obligations arising from the property sale transaction.