Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Duress

Legal area

Court

7 Oct 2025

YONG THIEN YEW 1. ) LIM CHEE HOW 2. ) SYARIKAT LIM KIAM HOON (DIDAKWA SEBAGAI FIRMA)

Citation

KB-22NCvC-8-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KB-22NCvC-8-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence the Court found the Plaintiff paid the full purchase price supported by contemporaneous documents; the Agreement, SPA and Form 14A reflected the parties' intention; the First Defendant failed to discharge the burden to prove duress or non est factum and omitted a material witness, so the Plaintiff is entitled to specific performance and the sum of RM8,726.10 with interest plus removal of the caveat and execution of transfer forms.
13 Aug 2025

D2D BIZHUB SDN. BHD. 1. ) ALPHA FINTECH SDN. BHD. 2. ) KOH CHEE SIONG BUKAN PIHAK-PIHAK TEOH WENG BOON

Citation

WA-22NCC-641-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-641-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The counterclaim against Teoh was struck out because it disclosed no reasonable cause of action: pleadings lacked particulars tying Teoh to any conspiracy or fraud, he had no privity or direct dealings with the counterclaimants and acted only as a conduit on D2D Bizhub's instructions; the claims sought to relitigate matters already rejected in prior summary judgment, were frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process, and therefore properly struck out under Order 18 r.19(1)(a)-(d) and the court's inherent jurisdiction (O.92 r.4).
29 Apr 2025

Joon Zheng Han [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-359-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-359-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that each appellant had possession and knowledge of methamphetamine: the deliberate and meticulous concealment (taped packages on both thighs and hidden in shoes), admissions in cautioned statements, CCTV and forensic analysis supported the inference of knowledge. Duress and innocent‑carrier defences failed (duress not imminent/extreme; defence evidence not credible). Alcontara notices were imperfect and did not oblige further inquiry. Accordingly convictions under s39B(1)(a) ADB and sentences were upheld.
29 Apr 2025

Lim Zhen Qiang [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-344-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-344-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Given the deliberate and elaborate concealment of methamphetamine on each appellant's person and in their footwear, corroborating admissions in cautioned statements, absence of imminent duress, imperfect Alcontara particulars, and the failure to raise a reasonable doubt or rebut the statutory presumption under section 37(da) ADB, the Court found appellants had possession and knowledge and affirmed convictions for trafficking; therefore appeals were dismissed and sentences affirmed.
29 Apr 2025

Yap Fook Chen [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-358-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-358-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that each appellant had possession and knowledge of the methamphetamine based on the methodical concealment on their bodies and in shoes, admissions in cautioned statements, and failure of the defence to raise credible duress or innocent-carrier explanations; Alcontara notices were incomplete and SD9's testimony did not exculpate appellants; accordingly convictions under s39B(1)(a) DDA were upheld and sentences affirmed.
23 Apr 2025

NG SOW LENG Mooi Chee Meng [Bertindak sebagai Pentadbir yang dilantik melalui Surat Kuasa Mentadbir bawah Saman Pemula No: BA-31NCvC-671-04/2025 bagi Harta Pusaka, MOOI CHEE MENG (No. K/P: 750603-08-5481) dalam tindakan asal] PIHAK TERKILAN

Citation

BA-22NCvC-276-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-276-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 14.3.2018 and accompanying transfer documents were validly executed by the defendant, that allegations of misrepresentation/duress/conspiracy were not proven and were a later invention, that the solicitor firm owed no duty of care to the defendant as a non‑client; accordingly specific performance of the sale was ordered and the defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
18 Apr 2025

D2D BIZHUB SDN. BHD. 1. ) ALPHA FINTECH SDN. BHD. 2. ) KOH CHEE SIONG BUKAN PIHAK-PIHAK TEOH WENG BOON

Citation

WA-22NCC-641-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-641-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff established the Order 14 prerequisites and produced documentary evidence (settlement agreement and correspondence) conclusively acknowledging the RM1,250,000 debt; defendants failed to adduce credible evidence to create triable issues on identity of lender, repayments, duress or illegality; estoppel applies to bar re-opening of settled issues; summary judgment granted for RM1,250,000 with interest at 8% p.a. from 31.05.2024 and costs RM4,000.
22 Jan 2025

RAJA ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN RAJA HUSSIN MOHD HANAFIAH ABDUL JALIL

Citation

WA-22NCvC-447-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-447-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court granted summary judgment because the Defendant admitted signing the deed, the duress allegation was an unpleaded afterthought unsupported by prompt or independent evidence, statutory declarations corroborated voluntary signing, and s.92 Evidence Act 1950 bars oral contradiction of the written deed, leaving no triable issue as to liability under the deed.
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.
21 May 2024

1. ) CONDOLINK SDN BHD 2. ) LAI CHEE KEONG 3. ) MOK YOKE SOON 4. ) KASIMENTARI SDN BHD 1. ) ANCHORSOL WALL SDN BHD 2. ) ANCHORSOL CONCRETE INDUSTRIES SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-90-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-90-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to discharge the burden on balance of probabilities to prove fraud, coercion, duress, undue influence or mistake in respect of the Final Letter of Undertaking and payments; the Global Settlement was entered voluntarily, plaintiffs delayed raising complaints and had available remedies earlier; accordingly plaintiffs' claim is dismissed and defendants receive costs on an indemnity basis for bad faith conduct though their declaratory counterclaim was not granted.