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.


London continues to dominate the global forex market with nearly 38% of total trading volume, making it a key hub for currency pricing and liquidity for brokers and traders worldwide.

The Year of the Horse is predicted to be a year of intense market volatility—and in astrology, volatility can mean opportunity for disciplined traders who manage risk well. According to astrologers and market observers, the movements of major planets this year could strongly influence financial outcomes for certain zodiac signs, especially those involved in trading markets like Forex, stocks, and crypto.

The name BTC-e is one of the most talked-about in cryptocurrency history—not because it was innovative, but because it became a symbol of the “dark side” of digital assets. Recently, this story has resurfaced after Alexander Vinnik, a man widely seen as the owner and operator of BTC-e, was released from a U.S. prison and returned to Russia as part of a government prisoner swap.

Did IVY Markets deduct unfair fees from your deposit amount? Has your forex trading account been deleted by the broker on your withdrawal request? Failed to withdraw your funds after accepting the IVY Markets deposit bonus? Did the broker fail to address your trading queries, whether via email or phone? Such issues have been affecting many traders, who have expressed their displeasure about these on broker review platforms. In this IVY Markets review article, we have investigated some complaints. Keep reading to know the same.