简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
Justice Served: Illegal Investment Scheme Ends in RM28 Million Repayment
Abstract:The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that a Singaporean businessman, Chan Cheh Shin, must return RM28 million to 122 Malaysian investors after the court determined that his investment operations were conducted illegally.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that a Singaporean businessman, Chan Cheh Shin, must return RM28 million to 122 Malaysian investors after the court determined that his investment operations were conducted illegally. The decision highlights the importance of regulatory compliance and investor protection within the financial sector.
The ruling, delivered by Judicial Commissioner Datuk Mohd Arief Emran Arifin, concluded that Chan had collected investment funds without the required approval from the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SC). The court found that Chan's activities violated Malaysian financial regulations, rendering his operations unlawful.
Chan, the director and founder of Fulda Malaysia Bhd, promoted various investment products through roadshows and seminars. These promotional efforts, which began in 2016, targeted Malaysian investors who subsequently invested their money into Fulda Malaysia Bhd and another company, Palau Capital Ltd, based in Singapore, where Chan also held a directorial position.
The plaintiffs in the case alleged that Chan had persuaded them to invest in numerous financial products, including overseas ventures, with promises of substantial returns. They also stated that Chan, reportedly credentialed as a “leading banker” with expertise in finance and investments, assured them that he would carefully manage their funds and personally cover any potential losses. Despite these assurances, the investors received no returns on their investments, prompting them to file a lawsuit in 2022 to recover their money.

In an online judgement, Judicial Commissioner Arief ordered Chan to repay the RM28 million to the 122 investors. Additionally, Chan is required to pay interest at a rate of 5% per annum on the amount owed, calculated from the date the lawsuit was filed until the judgement sum is fully settled.
The plaintiffs were represented by lawyers M. Manian and R. Gajelan, while Chans legal defence was handled by Ravi Nekoo and Sarah Anthony. Following the ruling, Ravi Nekoo indicated that his client intends to appeal the decision, though further details on the appeal process were not disclosed.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
Read more

Seacrest Markets Exposed: Are You Facing Payout Denials and Spread Issues with This Prop Firm?
Seacrest Markets has garnered wrath from traders owing to a variety of reasons, including payout denials for traders winning trading challenges, high slippage causing losses, the lack of response from the customer support official to address withdrawal issues, and more. Irritated by these trading inefficiencies, a lot of traders have given a negative review of Seacrest Markets prop firm. In this article, we have shared some of them. Take a look!

GKFX Review: Are Traders Facing Slippage and Account Freeze Issues?
Witnessing capital losses despite tall investment return assurances by GKFX officials? Do these officials sound too difficult for you to judge, whether they offer real or fake advice? Do you encounter slippage issues causing a profit reduction on the GKFX login? Is account freezing usual at GKFX? Does the United Kingdom-based forex broker prevent you from accessing withdrawals? You are not alone! In this GKFX review guide, we have shared the complaints. Take a look!

Is Seaprimecapitals Regulated? A Complete Look at Its Safety and How It Works
The straightforward answer to this important question is no. Seaprimecapitals works as a broker without proper regulation. This fact is the most important thing any trader needs to know, because it creates serious risks for your capital and how safely the company operates. While this broker offers some good features, like the popular MetaTrader 5 platform and a low starting deposit, these benefits cannot make up for the major risks that come from having no real financial supervision. This article will give you a detailed, fact-based look at Seaprimecapitals regulation, what the company claims to do, the services it provides, and the clear differences between official information and user reviews. Our purpose is to give you the information you need to make a smart decision about the risks and benefits of working with this company.

Major Complaints of MUFG Broker in 2025 You Shouldn’t Ignore
2025 is about to end, and if you still want to be a trader or investor and are looking for a broker to invest with. It is important to read real user complaints first. This will help you understand the kind of problems users are facing with MUFG broker. In this article, we will tell you about the major complaints users have reported about MUFG in 2025, so you know what to watch out for. Do not ignore this MUFG broker article and understand the problems.
