Latest news with #RameshRajaratnam
Free Malaysia Today
15-05-2025
- Business
- Free Malaysia Today
Businessman's challenge on validity of insider trading law struck out
The High Court in Kuala Lumpur ruled that the originating summons filed by a former executive deputy chairman of Malaysian Merchant Marine Bhd was an abuse of the court process. KUALA LUMPUR : The High Court here has struck out a civil suit filed by former executive deputy chairman of Malaysian Merchant Marine Bhd (MMM) Ramesh Rajaratnam challenging the validity of Malaysia's insider trading law. The suit was filed against the Securities Commission and the government. According to a statement issued by the SC today, Justice Amarjeet Singh, who made the ruling, held that the originating summons filed by Ramesh was an abuse of the court process. He awarded costs of RM5,000 each to the SC and the government. On Sept 10 last year, Ramesh filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that Section 188(2)(a) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA) was contrary to Articles 5(1), 8(1) and (2), 10(1)(a) and 13 of the Federal Constitution and was, therefore, null, void, and of no effect immediately. On Oct 8, the SC filed an application to strike out the civil suit on grounds that it was barred by res judicata, amounted to an abuse of process, and was a collateral attack upon Ramesh's criminal conviction by the sessions court and his ongoing criminal appeal before the High Court. Ramesh was charged in the sessions court on April 29, 2015, with three charges of insider trading under Section 188(2)(a) of the CMSA. He was convicted following a full trial and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment and a fine of RM3 million for each charge. Upon an appeal to the High Court, his conviction and sentence on all three charges were set aside on grounds of judicial copying by the trial judge. The Court of Appeal reinstated his conviction and sentence for the first charge upon the public prosecutor's appeal and remitted the case to the High Court for it to be heard on its merits. The appeal hearing on merits is pending before the High Court.
The Star
15-05-2025
- Business
- The Star
High Court strikes out ex-MMM deputy chairman's suit challenging insider trading law
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court (Special Powers Division) has dismissed a civil suit filed by the former executive deputy chairman of Malaysian Merchant Marine Bhd (MMM), Datuk Ramesh Rajaratnam, against the Securities Commission (SC) and the Government. In a statement, the SC said Justice Datuk Amarjeet Singh Serjit Singh had ruled that the originating summons filed by Ramesh constituted an abuse of the court process, and awarded costs of RM5,000 each to the SC and the Government. On Sept 10, 2024, Ramesh commenced a civil suit at the High Court (Special Powers Division) and sought a declaration that section 188(2)(a) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA) was contrary to Articles 5(1), 8(1) and (2), 10(1)(a) and 13 of the Federal Constitution and therefore null, void, and of no effect immediately. In response, the SC filed an application on Oct 8, 2024 to strike out the civil suit on the grounds that it was barred by res judicata, constituted an abuse of process, and represented a collateral attack on Ramesh's criminal conviction by the Sessions Court and his ongoing criminal appeal before the High Court. Ramesh was previously charged at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on Oct 29, 2015 with three charges of insider trading under section 188(2)(a) of the CMSA. He was convicted following a full trial and was sentenced to five years imprisonment and a fine of RM3mil (in default three years imprisonment) for each charge. In relation to the appeal to the High Court, Ramesh's conviction and sentence on all three charges were set aside on the grounds of judicial copying by the trial judge. The Court of Appeal subsequently reinstated his conviction and sentence for the first charge upon the Public Prosecutor's appeal and remitted the case to the High Court for the case to be heard on its merits. The appeal on merits is pending hearing before the High Court.
Malaysian Reserve
15-05-2025
- Business
- Malaysian Reserve
High Court strikes out former suit challenging validity of insider trading law
THE High Court (Special Powers Division) today struck out a civil suit filed by Malaysian Merchant Marine Bhd (MMM) former executive deputy chairman Datuk Ramesh Rajaratnam against the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) and the Government of Malaysia. Justice Datuk Amarjeet Singh ruled that the originating summons filed by Ramesh was an abuse of court process and awarded costs of RM5,000 to the SC and the Government of Malaysia respectively, SC said in a statement today. On Sept 10, 2024, Ramesh commenced a civil suit at the High Court and sought a declaration that section 188(2)(a) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA) was contrary to Articles 5(1), 8(1) and (2), 10(1)(a) and 13 of the Federal Constitution and therefore null, void, and of no effect immediately. In response, the SC filed an application on Oct 8, 2024 to strike out the civil suit on the grounds that it was barred by res judicata, amounted to an abuse of process, and was a collateral attack upon his criminal conviction by the Sessions Court and his ongoing criminal appeal before the High Court. Ramesh was previously charged at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on April 29, 2015 with three charges of insider trading under section 188(2)(a) of the CMSA. He was convicted following a full trial and was sentenced to five years imprisonment and a fine of RM3 million (in default three years imprisonment) for each charge. In relation to the appeal to the High Court, the statement said Ramesh's conviction and sentence on all three charges were set aside on the grounds of judicial copying by the trial judge. The Court of Appeal subsequently reinstated his conviction and sentence for the first charge upon the Public Prosecutor's appeal and remitted the case to the High Court for the case to be heard on its merits. The appeal on merits is pending hearing before the High Court. — TMR
