1. ) LEONG MING KWAI 2. ) GAN BEE AI v 1. ) CITIBANK BERHAD 2. ) LOW KAI XIAN 3. ) LIM SENG HAN 4. ) TAN CHIN WEI 5. ) TETUAN SHAHRIZAL & NASIR 6. ) KOO SHI XUN 7. ) SHAHRIZAL BIN ABD RAHMAN

wa-22ncvc-732-11-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 5 December 2024 • WA-22NCvC-732-11/2021 • 46 min read
20 cases cited (0 SG, 20 foreign)

Catchwords

TORT – Negligence – Duty of care – Banker and customer relationship – Plaintiffs alleged the bank breached its duty of care by releasing the original property title to third parties based on a forged Letter of Authorisation – Whether a concurrent duty in tort can override or circumvent express contractual terms – Whether the bank was obligated to conduct further verification (e.g., a call-back) when signatures matched the bank's records. CONTRACT – Sale and Purchase of Land – Validity of Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) – Allegation of forgery and lack of intention to sell – Plaintiffs alleged the transaction was an illegal loan agreement and that documents were signed under the guise of lodging a caveat – Plaintiffs admitted receiving payments from the purchasers – Whether the SPA was valid and binding. TORT – Conspiracy and Fraud – Solicitors – Solicitor signed as an attesting witness to the SPA and other documents without being personally present during the execution by the Plaintiffs – Whether a breach of professional ethics ipso facto establishes civil liability for the tort of conspiracy – Failure of the Plaintiffs to properly plead the elements of conspiracy by lawful or unlawful means. EVIDENCE – Burden of Proof – Forgery – Section 101 Evidence Act 1950 – Plaintiffs challenged the authenticity of their signatures on the SPA and Letter of Authorisation – Necessity of expert evidence to prove forgery – Failure to adduce expert handwriting evidence – Failure to call the key witness (the alleged illegal moneylender) – Effect of failing to call a material witness.

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (10)

Parties (9)

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (20)

UK (4)
[1922] 2 AC 36 [1986] AC 80 [1989] 2 All ER 159 [1990] 1 QB 993
MY (16)
[1971] 2 MLJ 196 [1984] 2 MLJ 10 [1993] 2 CLJ 464 [1996] 4 CLJ 1 [2001] 2 CLJ 344 [2009] 1 MLJ 349 [2010] 4 CLJ 203 [2011] 7 MLJ 621 [2014] 7 MLJ 104 [2015] 6 MLJ 1 [2016] MLJU 1648 [2017] 2 MLJ 629 [2017] 4 MLJ 697 [2018] 5 MLJ 561 [2019] 2 MLJ 553 [2021] MLJU 574

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ncvc-732-11-2021)