Siapa cepat dia dapat, those that choose to trust his lies never sue, while these 15 investors sued him immediately when BNM raided them. Hopefully the court can force Goh Hwan Hua to sell some of his assest or his children/mistress assests and repay these 15 investors. For the other 200+ investors that sued later, I think got nothing more....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investors succeed legal action against MyAirline co-founder Goh, four companies
https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/769743KUALA LUMPUR (Sept 9): The High Court has ruled in favour of 15 investors who sued MyAirline co-founder Datuk Allan Goh Hwan Hua over the alleged failure to pay to the investors monthly redemption value sums and financing returns from the investors’ outlay of about RM8 million.
High Court judge Leong Wai Hong, who delivered the decision on Tuesday, ruled that the investors had proven their case on the balance of probabilities and ordered the sum of RM7,610,000 and S$170,000 to be paid back to them.
The court also awarded costs of RM100,000 to be paid jointly or severally by Goh, along with defendants i-Serve Online Mall Sdn Bhd (ISOM), Bright Moon Venture PLT (BMV), QA Smart Partnership PLT (QAS), and Trillion Cove Holdings Bhd (TCH).
To be jointly or severally liable means each defendant named under an order is responsible for paying off the debt either individually or as a group. If anyone is unable to pay, the rest must shoulder the burden until the debt is paid.
In the legal action filed in 2022, the investors said that the companies had failed to make the agreed-upon monthly payments from November 2021 to June 2022, despite numerous letters of demand issued.
The investors also noted that the payments to them stopped in November 2021, around the time that Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) had raided ISOM, TCH, and other companies, and subsequently froze their banking accounts.
The investors say that a failure to make the payments was a breach of agreement, and they are seeking their full investment amount, as well as arrears of the monthly payments. They also claim that Goh had perpetrated fraud by misrepresenting that some of the defendants were legitimate operations.
The plaintiffs claim that Goh is the “controlling mind” of the defendants and cited notices, announcements, and teleconferences organised by or under Goh and ISOM’s instructions regarding investments via BMV, QAS, and TCH.
The defendants had filed an application to strike out the suit on the basis that the legal action was a nullity and an abuse of the court process.
Some defendants contended that the plaintiffs were “statutorily prohibited” from filing the legal action, as the sum demanded was part of the monies seized by BNM under the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) in late 2021.
However, in December 2023, the High Court had ruled that there were issues in the case that had to be ventilated in a trial, including whether Goh and the companies had committed fraud.
The investors were represented by Rajesh Nagarajan, Sachpreetraj Singh, and Amanda Sonia Mathew. Messrs Mathews Hun Lachimanan is representing Goh in this matter. Messrs Chetan Jethwani & Company are representing ISOM and TCH, while the law firm KP Lu & Tan is acting for BMV and QAS.
May 18 2023, 11:08 AM, updated 2y ago
Quote
0.0458sec
0.69
6 queries
GZIP Disabled