'Fewer cases hanging over him': Najib happy with SRC DNAA
Najib's lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, said the former prime minister is pleased with the decision of High Court judge K. Muniandy, who had issued the DNAA order today.
"He is happy simply because there are not too many cases hanging over his head. He has been asking for a DNAA for sometime.
"He can concentrate on the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) case now," said Shafee in a press conference after court proceedings.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Express
an hour ago
- Daily Express
Drug trafficking accused acquitted
Published on: Friday, August 01, 2025 Published on: Fri, Aug 01, 2025 By: Jo Ann Mool Text Size: Paulos (right) thanking his counsel after the proceedings. Kota Kinabalu: A construction worker was freed by the High Court here from a charge of trafficking 54.24gm of syabu. Judge Datuk Duncan Sikodol on Thursday acquitted and discharged Paulos Yohanes of the charge without his defence being called. Duncan ruled that the court had found the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against Paulos on the charge he faced. Paulos, 34, was accused of trafficking 54.24gm of syabu on Aug 7, 2023 at 3.30pm, at the roadside in front of a factory, Jalan Tuaran – Kota Belud, in Tuaran. The charge under Section 39B (1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act (DDA) 1952 carries a punishment of either the death penalty or life in prison and whipping with a minimum of 15 strokes on conviction. The prosecution had called five witnesses to testify in the trial. Paulos, who had been remanded since being arrested, thanked his counsel after the proceedings. He was represented by counsel Edward Paul. Meanwhile, a 38-year-old man was sentenced to five months jail by the Magistrate's Court here for theft. Azizul Maslin, unemployed, pleaded guilty before Magistrate Wan Farrah Farriza Wan Ghazali to stealing 24 cans of Guinness Stout 500ml worth RM357.60 worth from the 7-Eleven outlet at Gaya Street, on Feb 5, this year, at 5.15am. He was charged under Section 380 of the Penal Code which carries a jail term of up to 10 years and liability of a fine on conviction. The court heard from the prosecution that the incident happened at 5.15am on Feb 5, when the complainant noticed the carton of alcoholic beverages missing from the display area opposite the cashier counter. The complainant suspected a man, later identified as Azizul, who had briefly spoken to him before leaving without making any purchase. CCTV footage later confirmed that Azizul had taken the carton and left without paying. A police report was lodged, and on Feb 7, at 9.30pm, the police arrested Azizul in Kg Air. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
New Straits Times
2 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Family wins suit over suicide in MMEA custody, govt to pay RM194,170
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has ordered the government to pay RM194,170 to the family of a man who hanged himself in a Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) lockup, ruling that his death was caused by serious negligence while in custody. Judge Datuk Alice Loke Yee Ching found that officers failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the suicide of M. Thinagaran while he was on remand for a drug trafficking investigation. The court allowed the negligence claim filed by the deceased's wife, R. Tenaswari, and father, K. Madhavan, who sued the government and two MMEA officers, as co-administrators of Thinagaran's estate. Loke said authorities created the very conditions that enabled Thinagaran to end his life. "The deceased hung the extra pair of pants from a grill on the ceiling, which had been installed after a previous escape by a detainee. "Unfortunately, the grill and the pants became the very means for the deceased to harm himself. "There was no reason to have provided the deceased with the extra pair of pants. "The presence of the grill ought to have raised a red flag. "The defendants obviously overlooked this and should have taken steps to avoid exposing the deceased to danger," she said in her written judgment dated July 28. She said there was a clear breach of duty as the deceased was given an extra pair of trousers in a lockup with a ceiling grill, where the risk of suicide among detainees was foreseeable. The court also found that the MMEA lockup in Klang was not a gazetted detention facility and that its closed-circuit television (CCTV) system was only monitored once every hour. "Monitoring at hourly intervals defeats the purpose of having CCTV. "It is meant for continuous monitoring. Had there not been a lapse in monitoring, the suicide could have been prevented. "The lack of closer monitoring caused the officers on duty to miss the entire series of actions taken by the deceased just prior to his suicide," the judge said. The court dismissed the government's defence that Thinagaran's death was unforeseeable or that his act of suicide broke the chain of causation. "His death was the very event their duty was directed at. "It is therefore not open to the defendants to contend that the actions of the deceased broke the chain of causation. "Persons in custody are susceptible to mental stress. "They are vulnerable to depression, and hence suicidal impulses are not unforeseeable." The court also rejected the argument that Thinagaran was contributorily negligent, saying he was under immense psychological pressure from facing a capital offence and that it would be unfair to blame him for his own death. The court awarded RM6,370 in special damages, RM5,000 for funeral expenses, RM10,000 for bereavement, and RM172,800 for loss of earnings. "It also awarded RM30,000 in costs to the plaintiffs. Lawyer M. Manoharan appeared for the plaintiffs, while senior federal counsel Siti Syakimah Ibrahim represented the defendants.
New Straits Times
19 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Retiree wins RM1.2mil negligence suit against law firm over UK property scheme
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has ordered a law firm and its partners to pay £198,320 (about RM1.2 million) in damages to a retiree for professional negligence linked to a failed property investment scheme in the United Kingdom (UK). Judge Ahmad Shahrir Mohd Salleh ruled in favour of Leelawathy PT Singam, finding that the defendants had failed in their duty of care, which led to her suffering significant financial losses. The defendants named in the suit are Tang Ching Yee, Loong Caesar, David Soong Tshon Li and Cara Yasmin Kamaruddin. All are partners at Messrs. Raslan Loong, Shen & Eow (MRLSE) except for Cara Yasmin who left the firm on Feb 21, 2017. According to court documents, Leelawathy in 2016 had engaged the defendants and instructed Tang, who at the material time was a practising solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales as well as an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya, to act on her behalf. This is after the plaintiff (Leelawathy) became interested in participating in an investment scheme involving residential units located in a student accommodation development known as the Scholar's Village along the Great Horton Road in Bradford, UK. The structure of the investment scheme involved several interrelated companies which collectively formed what was referred to as the Alpha Group of Companies (Alpha Group). The promotional materials presented to the plaintiff described the investment scheme as offering fixed rental returns of between eight per cent and 10 per cent per annum over a 10-year period. Based on the legal advice by Tang, the plaintiff proceeded to purchase four residential units in the investment scheme amounted to £198,320. She received the rental returns as promised for two years. However, in 2018, the rental payments began to decline and eventually ceased. Last year, the High Court of England and Wales ruled that the schemes marketed and sold by the Alpha Group constituted unregulated collective investment schemes (CIS). The plaintiff alleged that the defendants acted negligently by failing to advise her that the investment scheme could potentially constitute a CIS. She said the defendants failed to inform her that the guaranteed rental returns were not legally enforceable and that contractual arrangements involved significant legal risks. The defendants argued that their retainer was limited in scope as it did not extend to advising the plaintiff on commercial, financial or other non-legal risks arising from the contemplated transaction. The defendants submitted that Tang acted in the capacity of a conveyancing solicitor and her professional responsibility was confined solely to the legal process of acquiring title to the four units. However, the court was not persuaded by the defendants' arguments, noting that the scope of a solicitor's duty cannot be determined in a vacuum. The judge said the defendants failed to advise the plaintiff of the legal risk that the investment scheme could constitute an unregulated CIS under the FSMA. "The defendants also failed to explain the true nature, legal effect and associated risks of the contractual documents executed by the plaintiff. "I find that these breaches materially influenced the plaintiff's decision to proceed with the investment. But for the defendants' failures, the plaintiff would not have entered into the transaction. "As a direct consequence, the plaintiff suffered substantial financial loss," Ahmad Shahrir said in his ground of judgment dated May 22, this year. The court said the four units have since depreciated in value to the point that they are now worth substantially less with no resale value. He said the plaintiff continued to incur liabilities in the form of service charges and ground rent, despite the collapse of the investment and the cessation of any income stream.
