Written by Goh Jia Ni
Parties
Plaintiff – Karunakaran a/l Chatu (suing as President of Taekwondo Negeri Selangor)
First Defendant – Puvenenthiran a/l Gunnasekaran (sued as President of Galaxy Taekwondo Club)
Second Defendant – Azizul Annuar Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Adenan Satem (sued as President of Taekwondo Malaysi)
Third Defendant – Tan Sri Dato’ Sri (Dr) Mohamad Norza Zakaria (sued as President of Olympic Council Malaysia)
Brief facts of the case
In 2022, the seven Taekwondo clubs under Taekwondo Negeri Selangor (‘the seven clubs’) expressed dissatisfaction with Taekwondo Negeri Selangor’s (‘TNS’) financial accounts for the years 2017 to 2019. They filed a lawsuit (‘Suit 74’) in the Shah Alam High Court, seeking various remedies, including a full audit report for that period. However, the court dismissed the suit on the grounds that the clubs had failed to first exhaust TNS’s internal dispute resolution processes. Following this dismissal, TNS initiated a disciplinary investigation against the seven clubs for bypassing internal procedures, which ultimately resulted in the termination of their memberships.
The following year, in 2023, the seven clubs contested the disciplinary procedure and the Executive Committee’s decision via email but did not file a formal appeal. Instead, they escalated the matter to the national body, Taekwondo Malaysia (‘TM’), to initiate mediation. TM consequently notified TNS to attend a hearing to resolve the dispute.
During the hearing, TNS offered to reinstate the clubs’ memberships but attached two conditions:
- the seven clubs were to pay RM2,500 in legal costs awarded from Suit 74; and
- the seven clubs were to refrain from any further complaints regarding the 2017-2019 accounts.
TM rejected these conditions and directed TNS to reinstate the clubs unconditionally. When TNS refused, TM initiated its own disciplinary proceedings against TNS, informing them of its intention to revoke their membership. TNS subsequently agreed to unconditionally reinstate the seven clubs. Despite this compliance, TM proceeded to revoke TNS’s membership in January 2024.
TNS appealed this expulsion to TM but did not receive a formal response. It then turned to the Olympic Council Malaysia (‘OCM’) for mediation, citing constitutional clauses that mandate it for such disputes. OCM declined to intervene, stating it lacked the authority, which compelled TNS to bring the matter before the courts.
Consequently, TNS filed an originating summons seeking two reliefs:
- the extraordinary general meeting (‘EGM’) held on 17 November 2024 to address issues arising from TM’s withdrawal of TNS’s membership was unconstitutional, as the club that convened the EGM had not settled its membership fees and was therefore not entitled to call the meeting; and
- the removal of TNS’s membership must first be subjected to mediation.
In response, TM maintains that its expulsion of TNS was lawful and argues that only current members can request mediation, claiming TNS forfeited that right upon its expulsion.
High Court Findings
The High Court ruled in TNS’s favour, finding that the EGM convened on 17 November 2024 was unconstitutional, procedurally improper and violated the Constitution of TNS. The court also ordered OCM to mediate the dispute between TNS and TM through an independent arbitrator appointed by Asian International Arbitration Centre (‘AIAC’) within 30 days.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this case serves as a critical reminder that for sports bodies, strict adherence to their constitution and bylaws is paramount. It mandates the exhaustion of internal remedies like mediation before court intervention and underscores the fundamental necessity of procedural fairness in all decisions.
Published on 17 September 2025