Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Shariah compliance

Legal area

Court

22 Jan 2026

SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD (Dahulunya dikenali BANK PERUSAHAAN KECIL & SEDERHANA MALAYSIA BERHAD) 1. ) SD WORK SDN BHD 2. ) MD NAZIRUDDIN BIN MOHAMAD

Citation

TA-A52M-166-11/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

TA-A52M-166-11/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiff satisfied the Order 14 prerequisites and proved indebtedness by producing a certificate/statement of indebtedness which is conclusive absent manifest error; defendants failed to demonstrate any manifest error or particularised meritorious defence or triable issue (their defences were bare denials and legal assertions concerning Shariah compliance and authority were unsupported); accordingly summary judgment under Order 14 was granted for the plaintiff and costs awarded to plaintiff.
26 Nov 2025

MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 1. ) TRANSKON SDN. BHD. 2. ) YEE KIM MUN

Citation

WA-22M-1024-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-1024-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal is dismissed because the application to set aside the JIDA was inordinate and unexplainedly delayed (no extension sought), the JIDA was regularly obtained and validly served per contractual mode, and the Defendants failed to establish a bona fide triable defence: alleged Shariah non-compliance does not void the contracts by operation of s281 IFSA 2013, the Certificate of Indebtedness is conclusive absent manifest error which was not demonstrated, and the contractual right of set-off was properly exercised; accordingly the JIDA stands.
4 Mar 2025

SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. ) PRM FOODS & MARKETING SDN BHD 2. ) RAMLE BIN MUDA 3. ) CHE MINAH BINTI MOHD ALI 4. ) MOHD FIRDAUS BIN RAMLE

Citation

WA-22M-823-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-823-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 prerequisites and adduced cogent documentary evidence (service, Board Resolutions, BMIS e-certificate, certificate of indebtedness) such that defendants failed to raise a credible, particularised triable issue; alleged Shariah non-compliance did not automatically vitiate the contracts under IFSA s281; guarantees contained principal debtor and conclusive evidence clauses binding the guarantors; accordingly summary judgment entered for plaintiff with costs RM6,000.00.
30 Jan 2023

PINNACLE NEXUS SDN. BHD. LIMRA CAPITAL BERHAD PENCELAH HILTON WORLDWIDE MANAGE BRANCHCO LIMITED

Citation

PA-22NCvC-203-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-203-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the plaintiff, as prior registered owner, has a caveatable registrable interest and has raised serious questions to be tried regarding the legality and Shariah compliance of the Ijarah facility and the validity of the transfer; given evidence of a real threat of disposal to a potential buyer, the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo and therefore the interlocutory application to keep the private caveat in force was allowed.
26 Jan 2023

AMANAH INTERNATIONAL FINANCE SDN BHD 1. ) TAN SRI HALIM BIN SAAD 2. ) Abu Talib Bin Abdul Rahman

Citation

WA-22M-465-09/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-465-09/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held on the balance of probabilities that the 2nd tranche disbursement and the Efogen SPA were legally valid and Shariah‑compliant; the Shariah issues raised were not novel and did not require mandatory referral to the SAC; AIF proved TSH's breach of the Facility; HP was liable under the Assignment as principal debtor; Ta'widh is payable subject to SAC‑prescribed calculation.
23 Dec 2020

1. ) REKA INDAH DEVELOPMENT (PENANG) SDN. BHD. 2. ) IBRAHIM BIN ISMAIL 3. ) LIM SENG HOOI 4. ) ABDUL KARIM BIN MD OMAR 5. ) YEAP HOCK KEE BANK KERJASAMA RAKYAT MALAYSIA BERHAD

Citation

WA-22M-141-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-141-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff satisfied the Order 14 preliminary requirements; defendants failed to establish any bona fide triable issue because their Shariah objections were bald afterthoughts without contemporaneous evidence, documentary record established the transactions and agency, contractual terms authorized termination and acceleration on default, and Ibra' is only due on early settlement; accordingly summary judgment is appropriate and entered for the plaintiff for the pleaded sums together with late payment charges.
14 Dec 2020

1. ) MEGA FIRST MARKETING SDN BHD 2. ) PHANG CHEU PING OCBC AL-AMIN BANK BERHAD

Citation

WA-22M-254-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-254-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court allowed the defendant's O.18 r.19 strike‑out application because the Plaintiffs' claims were, on their face, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and an abuse of process; key causes of action were barred by res judicata as the Plaintiffs failed to raise them in prior Sessions Court proceedings; legal and regulatory principles (BNM guidelines, Contracts Act jurisprudence) demonstrate the pleaded grounds (Shariah non‑compliance, Ta'widh, Ibra', constructive trust, misrepresentation, fraudulent judgment) were unsustainable as a matter of law and did not merit trial.
11 Aug 2020

1. ) IKHLAS AL DAIN SDN BHD 2. ) SUNGEI WANG PLAZA SDN BHD 3. ) DATO SERI' ABDUL AZIM BIN MOHD ZABIDI 4. ) TAN PENG KOON AMBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD

Citation

WA-22M-45-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-45-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff established a prima facie case under Order 14; defendants failed to demonstrate any bona fide triable issue or other reason for a trial because the facility agreements and guarantees are binding, the bank had contractual discretion to accept or reject settlement proposals, any disclosure was permitted by the charge upon event of default, and any alleged statutory or Shariah breaches do not defeat the plaintiff's claim for recovery which is distinct from separate complaints that must be pursued separately; therefore summary judgment was warranted for the plaintiff.
18 Jun 2020

1. ) ALGAETECH INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD 2. ) DATO' PADUKA SYED ISA BIN SYED ALWI 3. ) ABDUL HAFIZ MAHMOOD BIN HISHAM 4. ) BOBBY RONALD 5. ) LM GREENTECH SDN.BHD. MALAYSIA DEBT VENTURES BERHAD

Citation

WA-22M-688-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-688-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff established prima facie entitlement to judgment by producing governing facility agreements, sale contracts, guarantees, utilisation notices and a Certificate of Indebtedness contractually conclusive save for manifest error; defendants failed to adduce evidence to show any genuine bona fide triable issue (no proof of manifest error, riba, duress, undue influence, or wrongful receiver conduct). Consequently summary judgment was proper and granted for the Plaintiff.
4 Nov 2019

Ambank Islamic Berhad Seacera Group Berhad

Citation

22M-487-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

22M-487-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant failed to demonstrate any bona fide triable issue; contemporaneous facility documents identified Shariah‑compliant underlying assets and sale/agency arrangements, the alleged witnessing requirement under Quran Verse 282 is not a legal prerequisite, and the Plaintiff's statement of indebtedness is binding absent manifest error; therefore summary judgment was proper.