TAN HOO ENG 1. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD 2. ) TETUAN SHEARN DELAMORE & CO. 3. ) [TIMBALAN ] 4. ) [Ketua Polis Negara] 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

TAN HOO ENG 1. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD 2. ) TETUAN SHEARN DELAMORE & CO. 3. ) [TIMBALAN ] 4. ) [Ketua Polis Negara] 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

The court held that AMLATFA seizure/freezing orders, read with the Act's broad definition of 'dealing', lawfully prevented transfers that would have produced the alleged accretions; the Settlement Agreement (Clause 3.2) was a clear, final bar to further claims; the claims were also barred by res judicata/issue estoppel given prior litigation; and claims against Shearn failed because solicitors owe no duty to opposing parties in these circumstances and their advice is privileged — accordingly the originating summons was dismissed.

Citation
WA-24NCC-599-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Tan Hoo Eng; 1st Defendant: CIMB Bank Berhad; 2nd Defendant: Messrs. Shearn Delamore & Co.; 3rd Defendant: Deputy Public Prosecutor; 4th Defendant: Inspector General of Police; 5th Defendant: Government of Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 September 2022
Case Number
WA-24NCC-599-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Originating Summons dismissed in favor of defendants
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Seizure Orders, Article 13 Deprivation of Property, Settlement Agreement Effect, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Legal Professional Privilege, Compliance With Statutory Orders, Set‑off
Source Language
Malay/English
Constitutional Law Banking Law Anti‑money Laundering Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Professional Negligence/privilege Equity Freezing Orders +8 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 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Hoo Eng

Plaintiff

CIMB Bank Berhad

1st Defendant

Messrs. Shearn Delamore & Co.

2nd Defendant

Deputy Public Prosecutor

3rd Defendant

Inspector General of Police

4th Defendant

Government of Malaysia

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether seizure under AMLATFA prevented accrual/crediting of interest on plaintiff's accounts between 2014–2020
  2. 2 Whether the 24.01.2020 Settlement Agreement precludes plaintiff's claim for additional accretions/interest
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff's claim is barred by res judicata and/or issue estoppel

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that AMLATFA seizure/freezing orders, read with the Act's broad definition of 'dealing', lawfully prevented transfers that would have produced the alleged accretions; the Settlement Agreement (Clause 3.2) was a clear, final bar to further claims; the claims were also barred by res judicata/issue estoppel given prior litigation; and claims against Shearn failed because solicitors owe no duty to opposing parties in these circumstances and their advice is privileged — accordingly the originating summons was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Originating Summons dismissed in favor of defendants

Orders

  • Originating Summons WA-24NCC-599-12/2021 dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay costs to CIMB Bank Berhad of MYR 20000.00