MEGAT ABDUL MUNIR BIN MEGAT ABDULLAH RAFAIE & 96 OTHERS MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM & 18 OTHERS

MEGAT ABDUL MUNIR BIN MEGAT ABDULLAH RAFAIE & 96 OTHERS MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM & 18 OTHERS

Judge found plaintiffs proved fraudulent misrepresentations and conspiracy by D1, D2, D3 and D8: RHB documents and TradeSmart account presentations were false, land title extracts were not owned by defendants, D1 admitted non-payment and was an untruthful witness; Loan Agreements had expired and repayment became due; D1,D2,D3 and D8 engaged in fraudulent trading within s.540 Companies Act 2016; accordingly D1,D2,D3,D5,D6 and D8 were held jointly and severally liable to repay RM12,988,685, D1's counterclaim dismissed, corporate veil of D8 lifted in respect of liability, and injunctions adjusted.

Citation
PA-22NCvC-45-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiffs: MEGAT ABDUL MUNIR BIN MEGAT ABDULLAH RAFAIE et al; 1st Defendant: MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM; 2nd Defendant: HASWIRA AIMAN BIN HASSAN MERICAN; 3rd Defendant: MUHAMED ERMAN BIN OMAR HATTAB; 4th Defendant: ZAHARIN BIN SAMSUDIN; 5th Defendant: MOHD IWAN BIN MOHD ISMAIL; 7th Defendant: MUHAMMAD SHUHAIZY BIN MOHD SHUHAIMI; 8th Defendant: NAR TRADING TRADERS SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 October 2022
Case Number
PA-22NCvC-45-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Fraud and Equitable Claims (fraudulent Misrepresentation, Conspiracy, Fraudulent Trading, Dishonest Assistance, Knowing Receipt) / Judgment After Full Trial (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs in part; claim allowed against D1, D2, D3, D5, D6 and D8; claim dismissed against D4 and D7 and against 9th-19th defendants; D1's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Conspiracy to Injure, Fraudulent Trading (s.540 Companies Act 2016), Dishonest Assistance, Knowing Receipt, Rescission (s.40 Contracts Act 1950), Lifting Corporate Veil, Mareva Injunction, Arbitration Clause
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Tort (conspiracy, Deceit) Company Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Injunctions Fraudulent Misrepresentation Conspiracy to Injure +7 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MEGAT ABDUL MUNIR BIN MEGAT ABDULLAH RAFAIE et al

Plaintiffs

MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM

1st Defendant

HASWIRA AIMAN BIN HASSAN MERICAN

2nd Defendant

MUHAMED ERMAN BIN OMAR HATTAB

3rd Defendant

ZAHARIN BIN SAMSUDIN

4th Defendant

MOHD IWAN BIN MOHD ISMAIL

5th Defendant

MUHAMMAD SHUHAIZY BIN MOHD SHUHAIMI

7th Defendant

NAR TRADING TRADERS SDN BHD

8th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Fraud and Equitable Claims (fraudulent Misrepresentation, Conspiracy, Fraudulent Trading, Dishonest Assistance, Knowing Receipt) / Judgment After Full Trial (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether D1 breached the Loan Agreement and whether repayment is due
  2. 2 Whether representations about D8's assets and trading account were true or fraudulent
  3. 3 Whether D8 maintained a trading account with RHB Investment Bank and whether RHB documents were forged

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found plaintiffs proved fraudulent misrepresentations and conspiracy by D1, D2, D3 and D8: RHB documents and TradeSmart account presentations were false, land title extracts were not owned by defendants, D1 admitted non-payment and was an untruthful witness; Loan Agreements had expired and repayment became due; D1,D2,D3 and D8 engaged in fraudulent trading within s.540 Companies Act 2016; accordingly D1,D2,D3,D5,D6 and D8 were held jointly and severally liable to repay RM12,988,685, D1's counterclaim dismissed, corporate veil of D8 lifted in respect of liability, and injunctions adjusted.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiffs in part; claim allowed against D1, D2, D3, D5, D6 and D8; claim dismissed against D4 and D7 and against 9th-19th defendants; D1's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • D1, D2, D3, D5, D6 and D8 jointly and severally to pay Plaintiffs RM12,988,685
  • Interest at 5.0 per cent per annum on judgment sum from date of judgment until full settlement