[3] Bridge Global alleged that it had contingent claims exceeding US$1.8 billion against PSI arising from the well-publicised 1MDB fraud and therefore had standing to petition as a contingent creditor. [15]Those decisions were relied upon by Doyle J in concluding that Bridge Global had standing to seek PSI’s winding up as a contingent creditor. [22]However, the Court emphasised that the investigative jurisdiction cannot be used to circumvent the threshold requirement that a petitioner establish standing as a creditor, contingent creditor or prospective creditor. [15] At [140]-[141], considering Re Atom Holdings [2023] (2) CILR 106 and Aubit International (FSD 217 of 2023, unreported, 17 October 2023). [17] At [140]-[141], considering Re Atom Holdings [2023] (2) CILR 106 and Aubit International (FSD 217 of 2023, unreported, 17 October 2023).