Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fraud allegations

Legal area

Court

3 Mar 2026

Brumasi Holdings Sdn Bhd (dalam likuidasi) 1. ) Bumaci Holdings Sdn Bhd 2. ) Soo Yuh Mian 3. ) Kang Hock Hin 4. ) Poon Kheng Chan 5. ) Kang Rong Ye 6. ) Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Johor

Citation

JA-22NCvC-123-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-123-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application is allowed because the recorded consent judgment dated 27.08.2017 is final and on the same subject matter between the same parties or their privies; the present proceedings, despite being dressed as fraud/undervalue claims brought by the liquidator, seek effectively to relitigate and nullify the earlier judgment and therefore are barred by res judicata, issue estoppel/extended res judicata and constitute an abuse of process under Order 18 r.19(1)(b),(c) and (d). Accordingly the writ and statement of claim against Defendants 2–5 are struck out and costs awarded.
24 Sept 2025

ZURICH GENERAL INSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. ) AMIR HAIKAL BIN KAMARUZAMAN 2. ) VICKNESWARAN A/L KALAISELVAN 3. ) KAVITHA A/P RAVI SANGKAR

Citation

JA-12A-28-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12A-28-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court upheld the Session Court: (1) insurer lacks the requisite legal interest to intervene in a running-down tort action where liability and quantum are the only issues; (2) insurance coverage is irrelevant to the determination of liability at this stage and must be raised by separate declaratory proceedings under s.96(3) RTA; (3) fraud allegations were not pleaded with particulars and are speculative; and (4) the appellant failed to comply with mandatory appeal filing and service timelines; intervention would cause delay and prejudice — accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the lower…
26 Mar 2025

Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd AAStar Trading Pte Ltd

Citation

WA-24NCC(ARB)-34-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24NCC(ARB)-34-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The discovery application was dismissed because the requested original cargo readiness declarations and related emails were neither relevant nor necessary to determine the setting aside application — production would amount to an attempt to reopen the merits of the arbitration; additionally the applicant failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall fresh evidence criteria, so the documents would not probably have altered the Appeal Board's conclusion. The discovery order was therefore refused and costs awarded to the respondent.
19 Mar 2025

IFCI LIMITED 1. ) BISHOPGATE CAPITAL LIMITED 2. ) ARCHIPELAGO INSURANCE LIMITED

Citation

WA-22NCC-705-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-705-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff proved disbursement and valid assignment of the PN and endorsement of the AIL policy; presentment at maturity was made and 1st Defendant failed to pay, creating a protracted default that crystallised insurer's indemnity obligation. Defendants having accepted jurisdiction and participated in proceedings are estopped from invoking forum/arbitration defenses; insurer's asserted cancellations/fraud/non‑payment defenses failed for want of notice, proof and because insurer had endorsed and treated policy as subsisting. Therefore judgment entered for Plaintiff against both defendants for t…
12 Dec 2024

1. ) BLJ Commercials Pte Ltd 2. ) Chen Boon Leong 1. ) Suntruck Sdn Bhd 2. ) Chen Boon Koh 3. ) Chen Boon Keng

Citation

WA-22NCC-632-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-632-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the Plaintiffs proved an undisputed debt of GBP357,250 by invoices, delivery documents, promissory notes and a post-dated cheque; the Defendants' claims of duress, fraud and defective goods were unsubstantiated and raised no triable issues, therefore summary judgment under Order 14 r.1 Rules of Court 2012 was appropriate and granted in favour of the Plaintiffs.
29 Sept 2023

ABDUL KADIR BIN HAJI SHEIKH FADZIR 1. ) MENARA JUTAMAS SDN BHD 2. ) AMCORP GLOBAL LIMITED (DAHULUNYA DIKENALI SEBAGAI TEE LAND LIMITED)

Citation

BA-22NCvC-361-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-361-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The claim is barred by res judicata because the issues concerning the guarantee and indemnity, including beneficiary identity and entitlement to enforce, were raised or could and should have been raised in Suit 99 and subsequent appeals; the plaintiff failed to particularise any actual positive fraud as required by s 44 Evidence Act 1950; the action is an abuse of process and plainly and obviously unsustainable, therefore it is struck out.
16 May 2023

1. ) MOHAMMAD HAFIZI BIN BAHARI 2. ) XXXX 1. ) THANABALAN A/L M RAJAMANICKAM 2. ) PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BERHAD

Citation

JA-A53KJ-632-09/2016 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-A53KJ-632-09/2016 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Application in Lampiran 137 is dismissed because the matters the intervener seeks to re-litigate were already tried and decided on the merits in concurrent High Court proceedings (res judicata/multiplicity/abuse of process); the default/interlocutory judgment dated 28/9/2017 was regular and final after assessment and the intervener failed to demonstrate an arguable defence or exceptional grounds to set it aside, and the proper party to challenge that judgment was the defendant who failed to act earlier.
23 Mar 2023

MD SU'AIMY BIN WAHAB 1. ) RAHMAH BINTI AHMAD 2. ) MD SU'AIMY BIN WAHAB (sebagai wakil diri bagi harta pusaka Wahab Bin Md Isa, si mati) 3. ) SAADIAH BINTI OSMAN 4. ) MD SU'AIMY BIN WAHAB

Citation

PA-24ncvc-1016-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-24ncvc-1016-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found applicant was an aggrieved heir with locus standi and that the prerequisites for declaratory relief were met; court also held the sale agreement could be enforceable on the facts but, balancing jurisdictional and discretionary considerations, exercised its power to grant the originating summons (Lampiran 28) and allowed the application with costs to be borne by the parties respectively.
21 Nov 2022

Westford Limited Archipelago Insurance Limited

Citation

WA-22NCC-622-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-622-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Endorsement No.4 was valid and increased the Policy limit to USD 5,000,000; the Phoenix Orders constituted bona fide, arm's-length sales with title transfer in Dubai (an Approved Country) and were covered by the Policy; Archipelago's premature repudiation and failures (including failing to issue endorsement/invoice and treating cover as in place) breached the Policy and duties of good faith and estoppel prevents Archipelago from denying coverage; Archipelago must pay the insured loss to BGIS equal to the policy share of the two orders plus interest and costs.
5 Oct 2022

Ridhwan Hadibb bin Mohmad Haris 1. ) AXA AFFIN GENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD 2. ) Herry Kurniawan 3. ) Plastech Manufacturing Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-12A-35-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12A-35-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The sessions court judge did not err in allowing the insurer to intervene and be joined as co-defendant because the insurer has a direct pecuniary interest and its allegations of malingering are closely connected to the plaintiff's entitlement and quantum of damages; intervention under O15 r6(2)(b) ROC was appropriate and the plaintiff is not unduly prejudiced, therefore the appeal is dismissed.