1. ) JJ Power Groups Enterprise 2. ) JJ Global Network Holdings Berhad 3. ) JJ Global Network 4. ) Utopia Entertainment Sdn Bhd 5. ) PCP Global Tech Sdn Bhd 6. ) L&L Property Ventures Sdn Bhd 7. ) JJ Global Recipe Sdn Bhd 8. ) Penang Old Wong Sdn Bhd 9. ) JTOM International Sdn Bhd 10. ) Hansard Group Sdn Bhd 11. ) Job Cafe Sdn Bhd 12. ) Babablue Sdn Bhd 13. ) JJ Global Creative Enterprise 14. ) Golden Pheonix Restaurant 15. ) Team V Team Sdn Bhd 16. ) Lee Choong Sen 17. ) Tan Kai Lee 18. ) L...

05l-153-08-2022w Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 3 January 2024 • 05(L)-153-08/2022(W) • 31 min read
14 cases cited (0 SG, 14 foreign)

Catchwords

Judges (3)

Counsel (5)

Parties (25)

Case Significance

1. ) JJ Power Groups Enterprise 2. ) JJ Global Network Holdings Berhad 3. ) J... is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated January 3, 2024 (citation: 05l-153-08-2022w). <p>Twenty-four appellants comprising companies and individuals challenged the forfeiture of property under section 56 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act 2001 where no criminal prosecution was instituted. The Federal Court examined the standard of proof required to establish a predicate offence of cheating or unlicensed deposit-taking and the scope of appellate interference with trial findings of fact. The appeal was dismissed.</p> The panel comprised Abu Bakar bin Jais, Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim and Mary Lim Thiam Suan, with Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Dato' G. Jaya Prem (counsel for appellant), Mohd Shukri Bin Ahmad Mansor (counsel for appellant), Norzilati Izhani binti Zainal @ Zainol (counsel for respondent).

Summary

Twenty-four appellants comprising companies and individuals challenged the forfeiture of property under section 56 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act 2001 where no criminal prosecution was instituted. The Federal Court examined the standard of proof required to establish a predicate offence of cheating or unlicensed deposit-taking and the scope of appellate interference with trial findings of fact. The appeal was dismissed.

What was the outcome of 1. ) JJ Power Groups Enterprise 2. ) JJ Global Network Holdings Berhad 3. ) J...?

<p>Twenty-four appellants comprising companies and individuals challenged the forfeiture of property under section 56 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act...

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (14)

UK (1)
[1944] KB 718
MY (13)
[1997] 4 CLJ 645 [1998] 1 MLJ 1 [2016] 2 CLJ 763 [2016] MLJU 1823 [2018] 2 MLJ 401 [2019] 2 MLJ 536 [2020] 12 MLJ 67 [2020] 4 MLJ 721 [2020] MLJU 375 [2021] 2 MLJ 469 [2021] 4 CLJ 595 [2021] MLJU 32 [2022] 3 MLJ 786

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (05l-153-08-2022w)