Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Misappropriation of funds

Legal area

Court

27 Aug 2025

1. ) WONG POH WAH 2. ) TEO TZI SIN SEA TACKLE SDN BHD

Citation

B-02(NCvC)(W)-1841-09/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

B-02(NCvC)(W)-1841-09/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Appellants, as directors, owed fiduciary duties and breached them by failing to disclose and obtain informed consent for conflicts of interest and by misappropriating company funds as evidenced by documentary proofs; appellants failed to rebut the prima facie evidence; High Court award of RM1,000,000 in damages (apportioned equally) and interest was appropriate and is affirmed; appeal dismissed.
21 Aug 2025

1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN THE USJ 19 CITY MALL 2. ) PALAZZO EMPIRE SDN BHD 1. ) TIOW WENG THEONG 2. ) RAVANDIRAN A/L RAMAN KUTTY 3. ) CHONG WENG HONG 4. ) POTENSI TERUS INDUSTRIES SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-506-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-506-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found defendants 1–3 lacked lawful authority during the relevant period, failed to produce proper accounts or deposit collected cash, obstructed audits and violated provisions of the Strata Management Act 2013 and its regulations; accordingly they were jointly and severally liable for the misappropriated sum of RM1,010,195.61 and liable for the RM325,000 settlement paid to defendant 4.
20 Dec 2024

WA SKILLS TRAINING MALAYSIA SDN BHD 1. ) NURAIN BINTI MOHD SAKIRIN 2. ) PETER JOHN COOKE

Citation

BA-22NCvC-432-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-432-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found the defendants liable: the first defendant breached contractual, fiduciary and statutory duties and misappropriated company funds; both defendants participated in a conspiracy to misappropriate funds; the plaintiff had locus standi by board resolution; remedies include accounts, payment of missing sums, assessment of damages, interest and costs.
30 Oct 2024

XXXX XXXX

Citation

JA-22NCvC-64-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-64-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence placed in Part A of the Common Bundles the court found RM2,000,000 to be an acknowledged outstanding debt and that RM1,750,000 was withdrawn from the 2nd Plaintiff's OCBC account under Defendants' control and not applied to settle that debt; the Defendants failed to justify the withdrawals or support their counterclaim with evidence, and documents in Part A were binding as to their contents and meaning, therefore Plaintiffs' claims succeed and Defendants' counterclaim is dismissed.
21 May 2024

LOW KIM HONG LOW SHEE KIAN

Citation

WA-22NCC-917-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-917-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the plaintiff established serious triable issues on undue influence in the share transfer and on alleged misappropriation of RM4.7 million, that the balance of convenience favoured preserving the status quo given the Defendant's conduct in registering the transfer despite pending proceedings, and that damages would be inadequate for loss of a 77.5% controlling bloc of shares; accordingly the interlocutory injunction previously granted was maintained.
20 Feb 2024

TOP STRATA MANAGEMENT SDN BHD PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN BUKIT DESA KONDOMINIUM

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-90-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-90-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court maintained the Sessions Court’s finding that the 1st defendant is vicariously liable for the 2nd defendant’s misappropriation because the wrongful acts were closely connected with the 2nd defendant’s role as building manager and the employer’s business created the opportunity and risk; the plaintiff proved the RM 314,542.97 loss on the factual record and default judgment against the 2nd defendant reinforced that proof; contributory negligence is not a defence to fraud or to vicarious liability; appellate intervention was inappropriate as the trial findings were not plainly wron…
12 Jan 2024

1. ) HO HAU WONG 2. ) JERARD CO. LTD 3. ) JERARD GLAMOUR LIMITED 4. ) JERARD GLAMOUR STRATEGY LIMITED 5. ) RED AND BLUE INVESTMENT CO. LTD 1. ) CHIN CHOONG KIT @ JOSEPH CHIN 2. ) Choong Hoong @ Philip Chin 3. ) CHIN PENG SIN 4. ) Yap Wai Fo

Citation

WA-22NCC-14-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-14-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants failed to produce bank statements or independent evidence to show Plaintiffs' remittances were applied as agreed; a fiduciary relationship and joint venture existed between the 1st Plaintiff and the 3rd Defendant; unconscionable conduct and lack of explanation justify imposing a constructive trust so that the Defendants hold the shares and lands in trust for the Plaintiffs and transfer be ordered.
9 Nov 2023

SYED SADDIQ BIN SYED ABDUL RAHMAN

Citation

WA-45-21-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45-21-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the funds belonged to ARMADA, that the defendant as leader/trustee instructed unauthorized withdrawals contrary to party financial rules, that transfers of RM120,000 to his personal account amounted to dishonest misuse under s403 Penal Code and that subsequent transfers to his ASB account were proceeds‑movement constituting money‑laundering under s4(1)(b) Akta 613; defence explanations failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore conviction on all four charges was warranted.
16 Feb 2023

Secure Source Distribution (M) Sdn Bhd Fong Oi Lian

Citation

BA-22NCvC-544-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-544-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant admitted receipt of RM 886,645.16 and failed to prove entitlement to those sums; alleged verbal agreement was unproven and not pleaded; director's approval was given without knowledge of inflated figures and therefore did not amount to authorization or estop the Plaintiff; on balance of probabilities the payments were misappropriated and must be repaid.
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).