Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Disclosure of assets

Legal area

Court

15 May 2025

1. ) DIRK JOHANN QUINTEN 2. ) SIMONE QUINTEN 3. ) WOLFGANG ALBERT DORNER 4. ) HEIDRUN GERTRUD DORNER YEOH TEEN EAM

Citation

BA-22NCvC-468-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-468-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiffs established a good arguable case on the contract and entitlement to repayment on termination, demonstrated the defendant has assets within the jurisdiction (bank account and prior land title), and adduced evidence that the defendant dissipated property after the ex parte Mareva order; therefore the Mareva injunction application was justified and is allowed with costs.
26 Mar 2025

1. ) MAXI WONDER SDN BHD 2. ) FONG SAU YING 3. ) DATO' PANG YEE TECK 4. ) TAN HUI KANG 5. ) ONG AH CHOO DCS TRADING SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-110-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-110-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application for a Mareva injunction and for disclosure was dismissed because the Defendant failed to prove the essential elements: it did not demonstrate a good arguable case entitling it to the relief, it failed to establish a real risk of dissipation of the Plaintiffs' assets on the evidence (the alleged sale was not shown and land remained charged), and the Defendant itself was shown to be impecunious making any undertaking or security unreliable; the appropriate remedy if concerned about costs would have been security for costs rather than a Mareva order.
6 Mar 2025

1. ) BINA HARTA GROUP SDN. BHD. 2. ) LEE LUN TEONG 3. ) OO HENG TENG 4. ) CONEFF CORPORATION SDN. BHD. 1. ) YEE CHEE PANG 2. ) YEE JUNG DNG

Citation

WA-24NCC-122-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-122-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants proved a strong arguable case of contractual and statutory breaches and of diversion and dissipation of protected Housing Development Account monies; there was actual dissipation demonstrated by bank records and insufficient credible explanation from Plaintiffs; Defendants had standing to apply; therefore the Mareva injunctive relief previously granted was properly made and should be confirmed and varied to secure restrained sums and asset disclosure.
7 Feb 2025

PEMPETISYEN Tan Bee Geok 1. ) Thai Kim Sim 2. ) Tan Seah Lee PIHAK YANG DINAMAKAN Lin Woon Fui

Citation

WA-33-238-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-33-238-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Paragraph (b) of the Court Order was clear and required full disclosure of assets as at the effective date of the order (10 January 2024); monies in bank accounts and EPF are assets and required disclosure of balances and accounts; the First Respondent wilfully refused to comply and thereby committed contempt of court, justifying imposition of fines and costs with conditional imprisonment for non-payment or continued non-compliance.
30 Sept 2024

LAW MAY HUI@JULIET TEE KEN PING

Citation

BA-24F-257-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24F-257-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff entitled to maintenance but not the full inflated sum claimed; court applied means-and-needs assessment, found Plaintiff unable to work and previously received RM20,000 monthly, found Defendant failed to make full disclosure permitting adverse inference as to his greater means, and awarded RM20,000 per month from 4 June 2023 with arrears from filing date; costs RM8,000 awarded to Plaintiff.
1 Apr 2024

LIM MIOW KHENG TEE SWEE BENG PIHAK TERKILAN MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

Citation

BJ-78-1-12/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BJ-78-1-12/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Plaintiff is entitled to spousal maintenance under s.3; defendant's preliminary objection was dismissed; transfer of property does not extinguish maintenance duty; defendant failed to make full and frank financial disclosure and evidence (business registration and bank statements) supports that he has means; accordingly monthly maintenance fixed at RM5600 from December 2023 and arrears for May–November 2023 calculated at RM5600 per month to be paid within one month of judgment; costs to be borne by parties respectively.
27 Jul 2023

PEMPETISYEN UMA MAGESWARY A/P SUBRAMANIAM M.SURESH A/L MARIMUTHU

Citation

BA-33-154-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-33-154-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Interim maintenance granted because petitioner proved inability to maintain herself due to serious medical condition corroborated by medical reports and respondent has means to pay (ownership of multiple properties and inadequate disclosure of income); applying the s.78 means and needs test, RM1,500 per month was reasonable and within respondent's means pending final disposal of the divorce petition.
29 Nov 2022

XSPEC Resources Sdn Bhd (Dalam Penerimaan dan Pengurusan) 1. ) Zul Azmi bin Abu Hussin 2. ) Muzzam Teknologi (M) Sdn Bhd 3. ) Ishak bin Abu Bakar 4. ) ISQ Classic Enterprise (suatu nama perniagaan)

Citation

WA-22NCC-453-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-453-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the affidavit evidence the R&M demonstrated a good arguable case on breach of fiduciary duty, dishonest assistance, knowing receipt and conspiracy; defendants have assets in Malaysia and their conduct in diverting contract proceeds evidenced lack of probity creating a real risk of dissipation; accordingly an interim Mareva injunction and asset disclosure orders were justified and granted (with limited variations).
20 Sept 2022

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN LIM CHEE AIK VINCENT (LIN ZHIYI VINCENT) PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN PERBADANAN SETIAUSAHA KERAJAAN JOHOR (SSI)

Citation

JA-56J-15-04/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-56J-15-04/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court accepted that service on the named officer was proper, found on the totality of evidence (including admissions by SSI representatives and company search P1) that SSI had the capacity to pay the undisputed judgment debt, and exercised its discretion under s.4 Debtors Act to order immediate payment in lump sum within three months and to permit committal of the named officer on non‑compliance.
2 Aug 2022

ONG JIT KIEN YU SEW NGO@YEW SIEW NGER

Citation

CB-22NCvC-22-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-22NCvC-22-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff failed to prove the Defendant concealed assets or breached fiduciary duties; evidence showed the Defendant disclosed assets known to her and produced bank witness statements and account records, therefore the substantive claims failed, but the court exercised its equitable probate powers to appoint the Plaintiff as co‑executor to ensure transparency and resolve disputes.