Yap Zhen Yun

On the court record

Engages drug-trafficking defence under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, the strictness of the corporate veil, and the statutory immunity of financial-enforcement officers under AMLA and the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009.

Yap Zhen Yun's appearances in this corpus span drug trafficking, the corporate veil and financial-regulatory immunity. In the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) he acted as counsel for appellants in a drug-trafficking appeal under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. The appeal engaged whether exclusive possession had been established, the meaning of possession as comprising both a physical and a mental element, and the exclusivity of possession where more than one person had access. The court weighed the credibility of the police witnesses, the absence of corroborating fingerprint or DNA evidence, and the operation of the "double presumption" — the objection to relying on one statutory presumption to trigger another — in assessing whether the conviction could stand.

In a second Court of Appeal matter he acted as counsel for the appellant in a dispute concerning the termination of a tenancy agreement and an attempt to lift the corporate veil. The court reiterated that the lifting of the corporate veil is directed at imposing liability on individuals rather than on a company, and it found that the facts and evidence did not amount to equitable or constructive fraud sufficient to justify piercing the veil. The dispute also engaged clause 39 of a sale and purchase agreement, a claim for unpaid rent among group companies, and sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act 1950.

Before the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) he acted as counsel for a defendant in a matter concerning enforcement under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLA). The issue was the immunity of officers when enforcing that Act — 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 section 77 of AMLA for officers of a competent authority or relevant enforcement agency. Across these matters, Yap Zhen Yun's practice engages drug-trafficking defence, the strictness of the corporate veil, and the statutory immunity of financial-enforcement officers.