NOOR ISMAHANUM MOHD ISMAIL vs PP - 2018 MarsdenLR 1471

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 1471

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
NOOR ISMAHANUM MOHD ISMAIL – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Jamadi Saleh,Farah Saira Abd Razak ,Respondent Advocate: Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud

Table of Content
1. the seized properties in question involve monetary amounts linked to illegal deposits. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 23)
2. the role of civil standard of proof in forfeiture applications is emphasized. (Para 5 , 19 , 20)
3. the findings supported the lower court's decision; the appellant's claims lacked proof. (Para 30 , 31)

Abdul Rahman Sebli JCA:

[1] In the High Court at Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, the Public Prosecutor by Notice of Motion dated 7 January 2015 applied for an order of forfeiture in respect of two properties which Bank Negara enforcement officers had seized but in respect of which there was no prosecution nor conviction for a money laundering offence under s 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 ("AMLATFA") or a terrorism financing offence. The application was opposed by the appellant.

[2] The AMLATFA is the predecessor to the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 ("AMLATEPUA"). By operation of s 35(2) of the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967 , references in the AMLATEPUA to the AMLATFA are to be construed as references to the AMLATEPUA.

[3] The Notice of Motion was supported

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 1471

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYANOOR ISMAHANUM MOHD ISMAIL – AppellantVersusPP – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
NOOR ISMAHANUM MOHD ISMAIL – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent