Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sham transaction

Legal area

Court

3 Feb 2026

1. ) Norrisah Binti Abu Bakar 2. ) MANSOR BIN ABU BAKAR 3. ) ZAHARAH BINTI ABDULLAH @ WOON SEE MOI 4. ) ZALIHA BINTI ABU BAKAR 5. ) HAMIDAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 6. ) NORIAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 7. ) ROGIAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 8. ) SANI BIN ABU BAKAR 9. )

Citation

B-02(NCvC)(W)-179-02/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

B-02(NCvC)(W)-179-02/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court concluded the trial judge was not plainly wrong: absence of contemporaneous loan documentation, evidence of full payment to solicitors, the Order for Sale and conduct of the parties supported that the SPA was a genuine sale rather than a sham moneylending transaction; misconduct by solicitors did not convert the SPA into an illegal loan; the 5th Appellant's appeal was incompetent due to bankruptcy; therefore the High Court's dismissal was affirmed and costs ordered.
26 Nov 2025

Yong Wee Chong 1. ) Tan Booi Tiang 2. ) Tan Kim Hooi 3. ) John Doe 4. ) LEE KIAN HAN, TEE YEE KOON, PHANG SONG MUN, ALVIN LEE SZE CHANG (Kesemua beramal sebagai Rakan Kongsi bagi Firma Guaman Tetuan Han & Partners

Citation

JA-22NCvC-98-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-98-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to discharge the legal burden to prove the SPA was a sham, fraudulent or procured by misrepresentation; contemporaneous evidence was absent, pleadings and trial evidence were inconsistent, material alleged co-conspirators were not served or called, and the registered transfer to D2 therefore remains valid and enforceable, entitling D2 to vacant possession.
21 Aug 2025

AJ KASTURI SDN BHD 1. ) PANNIRSELVAM A/L MANNAR 2. ) UZINANI BINTI MOHD SANI 3. ) NG SEE HUA 4. ) LEE PENG KOON 5. ) LEE LEONG HUAT 6. ) NG SOON TEAM 7. ) TEH HOCK CHUN 8. ) KHOO SAY POOW 9. ) EI KIAN SEONG

Citation

B-02(NCvC)(W)-995-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

B-02(NCvC)(W)-995-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On the cumulative evidence the SPAs and attendant LOPs were sham instruments disguising illegal unlicensed moneylending; the Moneylenders Act 1951 protects borrowers so appellants are not in pari delicto; the SPAs are void and unenforceable; the High Court was plainly wrong and the appeals are allowed with damages remitted to the High Court.
7 May 2025

Lew Wan Nee Lim Ah Hock

Citation

KA-22NCvC-10-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-22NCvC-10-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the written PJB was a sham and in substance a loan secured by the property; because the defendant was an unlicensed moneylender under the Moneylenders Act 1951 the loan and related instruments (PJB and SKW) are unenforceable and void ab initio; therefore the court granted a declaration of invalidity, ordered removal of the defendant's caveat and return of the original title to the plaintiff, dismissed the plaintiff's claim for assessment of damages for breach of the PJB, and awarded costs of RM5,000 to the plaintiff.
21 Apr 2025

1. ) TADMANSORI HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATUK SERI UTAMA TENGKU ADNAN BIN TENGKU MANSOR 3. ) DATO' DR. TENGKU RETHWAN BIN TENGKU MANSOR 1. ) DANCOM TELECOMMUNICATIONS (M) SDN. BHD. 2. ) THREE WELLS HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 3. ) DATUK LIU THIM SOO

Citation

WA-22NCC-332-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-332-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The writ and Amended Statement of Claim were struck out because the plaintiffs’ own pleaded facts and contemporaneous documents demonstrated the sale of shares was genuine and not a sham; the claim was ex facie tainted by illegality/admission of sham which the plaintiffs failed to displace by the Patel trio; some defendants were not parties to the SPA and directors are not personally liable absent veil lifting; accordingly the action disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of process.
21 Apr 2025

1. ) TADMANSORI HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATUK SERI UTAMA TENGKU ADNAN BIN TENGKU MANSOR 3. ) DATO' DR. TENGKU RETHWAN BIN TENGKU MANSOR 1. ) DANCOM TELECOMMUNICATIONS (M) SDN. BHD. 2. ) THREE WELLS HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 3. ) DATUK LIU THIM SOO

Citation

WA-22NCC-332-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-332-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court struck out the writ and amended statement of claim because on the affidavit and contemporaneous documentary evidence the plaintiffs' allegation of a sham was unsustainable: plaintiffs had effectively admitted conduct inconsistent with a sham yet produced no internal supporting documents; post-acquittal conduct and full payment by instalments corroborated a genuine sale; the claim was frivolous/vexatious or disclosed no reasonable cause of action under Order 18 r 19 and relief was refused due to illegality/unclean hands; interlocutory injunction was set aside; costs awarded.
18 Apr 2025

CHEOW HOCK KEE CHAN YOK LIN

Citation

WA-22NCvC-131-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-131-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence the written loan agreement of 28.01.2019 and the sale and purchase dated 17.04.2018 are genuine and binding; defendant received RM200,000 and repaid RM40,000, leaving RM160,000 outstanding; plaintiff is not an unlicensed moneylender; defendant's counterclaim alleging sham sale and unlicensed lending fails; judgment for plaintiff for RM160,000 plus 5% p.a. from date of judgment and costs awarded to plaintiff.
5 Feb 2025

1. ) YONG KOK WAH 2. ) FUXING ENTERPRISE (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD 3. ) OCEANPRO INDUSTRIES SDN BHD Seow Sooncon (Mewakili Harta Pusaka Goh Swee Kim, Simati) PENCELAH WANG JIANXIA

Citation

KA-22NCvC-87-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-22NCvC-87-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs 2 and 3 failed to discharge the legal burden on the balance of probabilities and lacked a proper cause of action after expunction of key amended pleadings; the defendant established on the balance of probabilities that valid Friendly Loan Agreements existed and that plaintiffs received RM1,500,000 and failed to repay; accordingly the defendant's counterclaim succeeded and plaintiffs 2 and 3 are jointly and/or severally ordered to repay RM1,500,000 with 5% p.a. interest and to pay costs of RM50,000, while Plaintiff 1's claim was dismissed earlier with costs RM5,000 and paragraphs 7–…
15 Nov 2024

New World P&I Service Co. Ltd. The Disponent Owner and/or The Demise Charterer of the Ship and/or Vessel ES VALOR (IMO No. 9843625) of the Port of Monrovia, Liberia PENCELAH HUIHONG (TIANJIN) SHIPPING LEASE CO. LTD.

Citation

WA-27NCC-33-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-27NCC-33-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found on the balance of probabilities that (a) EVCL in fact continued to possess and control the vessel and had not treated itself as a mere gratuitous bailee after the owner's notice such that the demise charter remained in effect for purposes of s.21(4) UK SCA 1981, but (b) the Eversea charterparty was not binding because the signatory (Gu Feng) lacked authority and the agreement was in truth a sham; further the plaintiff failed to make full and frank disclosure material to the arrest application. Consequently the writ in rem was struck out, the warrant of arrest set aside and dam…
7 Nov 2024

1. ) ONG PAH KIAN 2. ) TEE JEN TONG 1. ) KOKELAVANEI A/P KUNJOO 2. ) SUREN A/L SREEDHARAN

Citation

BA-22NCvC-266-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-266-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found on the balance of probabilities that the SPA, Power of Attorney, Trust Deed and Form 14A were a façade for an unlicensed moneylending transaction rather than a genuine sale; as the agreement was illegal and unenforceable under Moneylenders Act 1951 s15 and void under Contracts Act 1950 s24, restitution was unavailable to the plaintiffs; accordingly the plaintiffs' claim was dismissed and the defendants' counterclaim allowed restoring title to the 1st Defendant.