Leng Wie Mun

On the court record

Leng Wie Mun appears in the reported corpus as a commercial and construction litigator, with contract, corporate and regulatory matters among the reported appearances. His construction work is visible in a High Court claim for the alleged wrongful termination of a construction contract and non-payment for works completed, where the issues were whether a valid and binding contract, express or implied, existed between the parties, whether the termination was lawful, and who was responsible for the delays. In a related appeal argued on a judgment in Bahasa Malaysia, a claim was dismissed and a counterclaim allowed with costs, testing the correctness of the decision below. His contract work also includes a Court of Appeal appeal on the termination of a tenancy agreement and the lifting of the corporate veil, where the court held that the facts did not amount to equitable or constructive fraud justifying the veil being lifted, engaging sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act 1950.

His reported matters reach newer and more specialised terrain as well. In one appeal the question was whether a friendly loan had been discharged by repayment made through fifty Litecoins to the lender's cryptocurrency exchange account. In a matter under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 he was engaged on the immunity of an officer of Bank Negara Malaysia under section 87 of the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009 and the wider immunity under the anti-money-laundering legislation when enforcing that Act, and in a Court of Appeal judicial review of the imposition of anti-dumping duties on imported fibre boards under the Customs (Anti-Dumping Duties) Order 2014, where a duty to give reasons was in issue. The reported matters mark Leng Wie Mun as a versatile commercial litigator moving between construction, contract, banking regulation and judicial review.