Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
JJ POWER GROUPS ENTERPRISE & ORS – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of forfeiture proceedings (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. overview of police investigations and findings (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. standard of proof in forfeiture proceedings (Para 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. arguments on standard of proof and predicate offence (Para 15 , 18) |
| 5. analysis of relevant case law (Para 22 , 23 , 25 , 27) |
| 6. interpretation of statutory provisions (Para 33 , 36) |
| 7. clarification on burden of proof (Para 41 , 46) |
| 8. finding of the high court on cheating offence (Para 50 , 52) |
| 9. reaffirmation of the evidentiary standards (Para 54 , 58) |
| 10. conclusion affirming court of appeal's decision (Para 59) |
Introduction
[1] This appeal deals with a forfeiture of property by the Public Prosecutor ("PP") where there is no prosecution or conviction for an offence of money laundering or a terrorism financing offence — a proceeding provided for under s 56 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 ("AMLA 2001"). It was the basis of the PP's application for forfeiture that the seized properties were "the subject-matter or evidence relating to the commission of an offence of money laundering un
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
