Receivership in Malaysia: A 2025 Guide to Appointments, Duties, and Priority Payments

Receivership in the Context of Malaysia's 2025 Insolvency Landscape

In 2025, the practice of receivership in Malaysia operates within a dynamic legal and economic environment. While the fundamental principles of receivership as a remedy for secured creditors remain, the landscape is increasingly shaped by the ongoing evolution of the Companies Act 2016 (CA 2016), recent court decisions, and a broader shift in insolvency practice towards corporate rescue and rehabilitation. While public discourse may focus more on bankruptcy and the new corporate rescue mechanisms, receivership remains a powerful and relevant tool for secured creditors.

The Core Concepts: Receiver vs. Receiver and Manager

A crucial distinction in Malaysian law is between a **Receiver** and a **Receiver and Manager (R&M)**. A Receiver's primary role is to take possession of the assets secured by a debenture and realize them to repay the secured creditor. An R&M, on the other hand, has the additional power to manage the company's business as a going concern to achieve this end. Most modern debentures grant the power to appoint an R&M, as this often provides the best opportunity to maximize the value of the assets.

Appointment of a Receiver and Manager

An R&M is typically appointed by a secured creditor under the terms of a debenture when the borrowing company defaults on its obligations. The debenture will specify the events of default that trigger the appointment. The appointment is a private, contractual remedy, but it must be exercised in accordance with the provisions of the CA 2016. In certain circumstances, the High Court may also appoint an R&M under Section 376 of the CA 2016 to preserve assets, even in the absence of a debenture.

The Impact of Recent Case Law

Recent court decisions have provided important clarifications on the powers of an R&M, particularly in relation to other insolvency proceedings:

  • Receivership and Winding Up: The High Court case of Ler Cheng Chye & Anor v Wong Ching Yong & Ors clarified the interpretation of Section 386(1) of the CA 2016. It held that an R&M appointed over a company that is subsequently wound up may continue to act as a "Receiver" to realize the secured assets without the consent of the liquidator or the court. However, to continue to act as a "Manager" and carry on the business, the consent of the liquidator (or the court, if refused) is required.
  • Receivership and Judicial Management (JM): The introduction of JM as a corporate rescue mechanism has led to a number of cases exploring its interaction with receivership. The courts have affirmed that a JM application triggers an automatic moratorium that can prevent the appointment of an R&M. However, if an R&M is already in place, or if a secured creditor with the power to appoint an R&M opposes the JM application, the court may dismiss the JM application in favor of the receivership.

Duties and Responsibilities of a Receiver and Manager

An R&M has a primary duty to the appointing debenture holder to realize the secured assets and repay the debt. However, the R&M is also considered an agent of the company and therefore owes duties of care to the company and other stakeholders. This includes the duty to act in good faith and to take reasonable care to obtain a proper price for the assets being sold.

The Crucial Order of Priority Payments

One of the most critical aspects of a receivership is the strict order in which the proceeds from the sale of assets must be distributed. Under the CA 2016, the R&M must make the following payments in order of priority before the debenture holder can be repaid:

  1. The costs and expenses of the receivership, including the R&M's remuneration.
  2. Wages, salaries, and other remuneration owing to employees (up to RM15,000 per employee) for services rendered within the four months prior to the appointment.
  3. Amounts due to the Employees Provident Fund (EPF), Social Security Organisation (SOCSO), and any income tax deducted but not remitted.

Only after these preferential creditors have been paid in full can the R&M distribute the remaining proceeds to the debenture holder.

Receivership in the Broader Insolvency Landscape of 2025

The insolvency landscape in Malaysia is continuously evolving. The new Cross-Border Insolvency Act 2025, which adopts the UNCITRAL Model Law, will have implications for receiverships involving foreign assets or creditors, facilitating greater international cooperation. Furthermore, the broader trend towards a more rehabilitative approach to insolvency means that the courts may increasingly favor corporate rescue mechanisms like JM over liquidation or receivership where there is a viable prospect of saving the business.

Conclusion

Receivership remains a powerful and effective remedy for secured creditors in Malaysia. However, the practice in 2025 is more nuanced than ever before. A thorough understanding of the CA 2016, the latest case law, and the broader trends in insolvency practice is essential for any Receiver and Manager, as well as for the secured creditors who appoint them and the companies that find themselves in this situation.

A deep dive into receivership in Malaysia for 2025. This guide covers the appointment and duties of a Receiver and Manager under the Companies Act 2016, the priority of payments, and the impact of recent case law on the interplay between receivership and judicial management. Learn about the evolving insolvency landscape and the implications for secured creditors and distressed companies.
Let us know how we can help