Shafie Apdal's son loses fraud claim over battery-making venture

 The son of Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal lost in his RM1mil fraud claim against three people over a battery making venture.
Mohd Shazni Mohd Shafie, 29, eldest son of the former Rural and Regional Development Minister, was ordered by a High Court to pay RM40,000 in costs.

Justice Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera dismissed the civil claim by Mohd Shazni after a full trial.

In his court papers, Mohd Shazni named automative battery charging company DT Synergy Sdn Bhd, its two directors Eddy Shahrizal Abd Halim and Zul Hatta Shamsudin and consultant Azzuddin Shah Kassim as defendants.

Mohd Shazni said the three met him at a hotel here to discuss and influence him to venture into the business.

On their requests, he said he went to Automative Battery Charging Industries Sdn Bhd's (ABCI) factory in Klang to see its operations.

He said the defendants persuaded him to invest RM1mil in the venture and that he would get 25% profits every year while owning 25% shares in the ABCI.

On top of that, Mohd Shazni said he was told that each of them would be investing the same capital for the business.

On their undertaking, he said, he paid RM1mil to them in two cheques and a cash deposit, as well as signed a shareholder agreement on June 5 last year.

He claimed that the directors and Azzuddin had fraudently used RM1mil to purchase part of the ABCI shares in the name of DT Synergy.

Mohd Shazni had sought for a court order for the defendants to return the RM1mil and general damages over the loss of the money.

In the statement of defence, the defendants denied any fraud and that the business venture had been explained to Mohd Shazni.

They said Mohd Shazni wanted to withdraw his RM1mil as he was not named a party in the ABCI agreement among its shareholders and DT Synergy.

They said they had tried to explain to the plaintiff that it was agreed for DT Synergy to get the ABCI shares first and later equally distribute among them but Mohd Shazni had filed the claim against them.

Speaking to reporters, the defendants' lawyers Pradeep Kumar Nandrajog and Dinesh Nandrajog said the judge held that the plaintiff have failed to establish fraud on the part of their clients.

"The standard of proof in a fraud case used to be 'beyond reasonable doubt'. However, it has been replaced by 'balance of probabilities standard as established in the Federal Court case of Sinnaiyah & Sons on Aug 10.

"Our case would apparently be the first case which would have applied the new standard of proof for fraud case in our courts since the said change," added Dinesh.