Contractual Breach Trust Law

Summary

Viva Yunus, as trustee, intended to use proceeds from selling a subsidiary for a new business. Fashionista Valleys failure to fulfill this purpose may constitute a breach of trust. Key elements include clear intention, failure to fulfill purpose, and resulting harm. Understanding whether a written contract exists is crucial for enforceability. For further legal advice, consider contacting a local attorney or the Seremban High Court in Negeri Sembilan.

Full Conversation

Viva Yunus, a brand ambassador and managing director of Fashionista Valley stated her intention and promise to sell a subsidiary company of TudungBawal Co in which she was the major shareholder and to donate the proceeds to build a new business selling perfume products under the brand of Fashionista Valley at KLCC. Her offer was accepted by Fashionista Valley. Fashionista Valley then entered a contract to open a branch business at KLCC but made no promise to introduce the perfume products after Fashionista Valley has been taken over by VentureCapital Co. (VCO). VCO bought the shares of Fashionista Valley from its previous shareholders who reported major losses in their * million investment portfolios in the company. Viva Yunus argued that there was a contractual liability and a breach of trust for not implementing/ going against the accepted promise. Viva Yunus, a brand ambassador and managing director of Fashionista Valley stated her intention and promise to sell a subsidiary company of TudungBawal Co in which she was the major shareholder and to donate the proceeds to build a new business selling perfume products under the brand of Fashionista Valley at KLCC. Her offer was accepted by Fashionista Valley. Fashionista Valley then entered a contract to open a branch business at KLCC but made no promise to introduce the perfume products after Fashionista Valley has been taken over by VentureCapital Co. (VCO). VCO bought the shares of Fashionista Valley from its previous shareholders who reported major losses in their * million investment portfolios in the company. Viva Yunus argued that there was a contractual liability and a breach of trust for not implementing/ going against the accepted promise. Viva Yunus, a brand ambassador and managing director of Fashionista Valley stated her intention and promise to sell a subsidiary company of TudungBawal Co in which she was the major shareholder and to donate the proceeds to build a new business selling perfume products under the brand of Fashionista Valley at KLCC. Her offer was accepted by Fashionista Valley. Fashionista Valley then entered a contract to open a branch business at KLCC but made no promise to introduce the perfume products after Fashionista Valley has been taken over by VentureCapital Co. (VCO). VCO bought the shares of Fashionista Valley from its previous shareholders who reported major losses in their * million investment portfolios in the company. Viva Yunus argued that there was a contractual liability and a breach of trust for not implementing/ going against the accepted promise.
Hello Naz,
To better understand the situation, could you clarify if there was a written contract between Viva Yunus and Fashionista Valley regarding the sale of the subsidiary company and the promise to use the proceeds for the new business?
Understanding this detail can help provide more accurate legal information.
unsure
Hi Naz, if you're unsure about a written contract, it could impact the enforceability of the promises made.
In Malaysia, for a contract to be legally binding, it generally needs:
- Offer and acceptance
- Intention to create legal relations
- Consideration (something of value exchanged)
If you can verify if there was any written agreement or documentation, it would help. If you need legal advice, you might consider contacting the nearest court in Negeri Sembilan for further assistance.

Seremban High Court


Phone: +*-* *
Address: Kompleks Mahkamah Seremban, Jalan Tuanku Munawir, * Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Website: http://www.kehakiman.gov.my/en
Would you like more information on how to proceed?
examine based on principles of trust law not contract
Hi Naz, let's look at this situation from a trust law perspective. In trust law, the key elements include:
- **Trustee**: Person holding the trust property (Viva Yunus).
- **Beneficiary**: Person for whom the trust is managed (Fashionista Valley and potentially the public for the new business).
- **Trust Property**: Assets involved (subsidiary company and proceeds).
For a valid trust:
- There must be a clear intention to create a trust.
- The trust property must be clearly identified.
- The purpose of the trust must be lawful and certain.
If these elements are met, Viva Yunus may argue a breach of trust for not fulfilling the intended purpose of the proceeds.
For further assistance, you may contact:
~Seremban High Court
Phone: +*-* *
Address: Kompleks Mahkamah Seremban, Jalan Tuanku Munawir, * Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Website: [Seremban High Court](http://www.kehakiman.gov.my/en)
Would you like more information on how to proceed?
who is the trustee in this situation?
Hi Naz,
In this situation, the trustee appears to be Viva Yunus, as she was the one holding the trust property (the subsidiary company) and intended to use the proceeds for the new business venture under Fashionista Valley.
how can she as the trustee argues that there is a breach of trust?
Hi Naz,
As the trustee, Viva Yunus can argue a breach of trust by demonstrating:
- **Clear Intention**: She intended to use the proceeds for a specific purpose (new business).
- **Failure to Fulfill Purpose**: Fashionista Valley did not implement the promised new business.
- **Resulting Harm**: This failure resulted in a breach of her fiduciary duty to use the proceeds as intended.
Would you need further assistance or details?