Ong Chee Kwan JC:

GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT

SIntroduction

[1]The Plaintiff is a victim of a cross-border cyber fraud known as a “push payment fraud” where the victim is tricked over emails to make a payment for a legitimate transaction into a different bank account under the control of the fraudster. Such a fraud has become increasingly common.

[2]In this case, through exchanges of emails, the fraudster (described below as Persons Unknown) deceived the Plaintiff into making payment of EUR 123,014.65 (approximately close to RM 600,000.00) (‘Plaintiff’s Monies’) into a CIMB bank account in Malaysia. The Plaintiff thought it was making a genuine payment to its South Korean counterparty for a commission payment. Instead, the fraudster has now siphoned the Plaintiff’s Monies away.

[3]This CIMB bank account is in the name of the 2^nd Defendant i.e. Premier Outlook Services. The 2^nd Defendant, Mohammad Azuwan, is the owner of the sole proprietorship of Premier Outlook Services.

[4]This judgment deals with 2 broad reliefs sought by the Plaintiff on an urgent ex parte basis via a hearing through thee-review platform:

(i)A proprietary injunction and Mareva injunction relief against the Defendants [Enclosure 3]; and

(ii)Substituted service by way of email and advertisement against the fraudster 1^st Defendant [Enclosure 4].

Background facts(i) The parties

[5]The Plaintiff, Zschimmer & Schwarz GmbH & Co KG Chemische Fabriken, is a German company and a manufacturer of speciality chemical products. It has a business arrangement with its representative company in South Korea, KoWorks where KoWorks would sell the Plaintiff’s products and the Plaintiff would make commission payment to KoWorks based on the sales. In the paragraphs below, KoWorks will be referred to as “Real KoWorks”.

[6]The 1^st Defendant, being Persons Unknown, is a defendant and/or a group of defendants who has infiltrated the email communications between the Plaintiff and KoWorks and participated in the fraud to deceive the Plaintiff into mistakenly paying the commission into Premier Outlook Services’ bank account in Malaysia. In the paragraphs below, where the 1^st Defendant was impersonating the Plaintiff, he/they will be referred to as “Fake Plaintiff”; where the 1^st Defendant was impersonating KoWorks, he/they will be referred to as “Fake KoWorks”.

[7]The 2^nd Defendant, Mohammad Azuwan bin Othman (“Mohammad Azuwan”), is the sole proprietor of Premier Outlook Services (“Premier Outlook”). The Plaintiff’s Monies were paid into Premier Outlook’s account in CIMB Bank Berhad (“Premier Outlook’s CIMB Account”).

[8]Kontiinuer Engenharia Industrial (“Kontiinuer”) is also a significant party to the fraud. The 1^st Defendant had first attempted to deceive the Plaintiff into paying the Plaintiff’s Monies into Kontiinuer’s bank account in Bank Muamalat Malaysia Berhad (“Kontiinuer’s Muamalat Bank Account”).

(ii) The 1^st attempted fraud

[9]The fraud can be divided into two stages. First, the 1^st Defendant had attempted to deceive the Plaintiff into paying the Plaintiff’s Monies into Kontiinuer’s Muamalat Bank Account but the attempt failed. Second, the 1^st Defendant then successfully deceived the Plaintiff into paying the Plaintiff’s Monies into Premier Outlook’s CIMB Account.

[10]I shall first refer to the fraudulent circumstances where the 1^st Defendant had attempted to deceive the Plaintiff to pay monies into Kontiinuer’s Muamalat Bank Account.

[11]On 3.9.2020, Real KoWorks sent an email with a commission statement to the Plaintiff’s representative, Mrs Ulrike Diel (“Mrs Diel”), to request for a commission payment of EUR 123,140.65 to be paid into KoWorks’ bank account, the Kebhana Bank in Korea.

[12]The 1^st Defendant then infiltrated the email communications between the Plaintiff and the Real KoWorks to execute the fraud.

[13]The actual fraudulent process itself is complicated and would probably become clearer to this Court at the trial of this action. But for the present purposes, it suffices to rely on a si