KUALA LUMPUR: A man who claimed that nearly RM60,000 disappeared from his Maybank account in just eight minutes has won his appeal to reinstate his lawsuit against the bank.
The Johor Baru High Court ruled that Wong Bair Lim's allegations of negligence and unauthorised online transfers raised issues that could only be resolved through a full trial.
Judicial commissioner Noradura Hamzah said the Sessions Court had erred in dismissing Wong's lawsuit without properly examining the disputed facts.
These included whether Wong had authorised the transactions and whether the bank had taken adequate steps to prevent possible fraud.
"The Sessions Court erred when it made findings of fact and resolved disputed issues at the striking-out stage.
"This was contrary to the established principle that a court should not conduct a detailed examination of documents and facts at such a stage," she said in her grounds of judgment published by the Judiciary Department today.
The case stemmed from an incident on July 13, 2024, when Wong discovered that RM59,867.61 had been transferred from his savings account through Maybank2u.
The money was transferred to four unknown recipients through 5 transactions carried out between 1.44pm and 1.52pm.
Just two minutes before the transfers began, the daily transaction limit on Wong's account had been increased from RM2,000 to RM60,000.
Wong lodged a police report on the same day before filing a lawsuit against Maybank in October 2024.
He alleged that the bank had failed to prevent the unauthorised transfers and had not taken appropriate action after receiving his complaint.
Maybank maintained that the transactions had been carried out and approved through Wong's registered device.
The bank also argued that Wong had downloaded a third-party application, which it said had contributed to his losses.
On Nov 14 last year, the Sessions Court allowed Maybank's application to strike out Wong's lawsuit, finding that his claim was frivolous, vexatious and unsustainable.
However, Noradura ruled that the lower court had made findings on disputed facts that should have been determined at a full trial.
Among the questions requiring examination were whether Wong had personally approved the transactions, who had increased his daily transfer limit and whether the bank's security verification system had been accessed by an unauthorised party.
Noradura also said banks had a duty to exercise reasonable care when carrying out customers' payment instructions, particularly in cases involving possible online fraud.
She said whether Maybank owed Wong a duty of care in the circumstances and whether that duty had been breached could not be determined without a full trial.
"The defendant's duty of care after receiving a complaint about unauthorised transfers is an issue that requires an assessment of the facts at a full trial.
"This issue alone is sufficient to prevent the plaintiff's action from being struck out summarily," she said.
She ordered the case, including pending applications, to be returned to the Johor Baru Sessions Court for further proceedings and a full trial.
Maybank was also ordered to pay Wong RM8,000 in appeal costs, subject to allocatur, before the trial begins.
The High Court's decision does not determine whether Maybank was responsible for Wong's losses, as that question remains to be decided at trial.
Wong was represented by Lim Pang Kiat and Fung Yu Qi, while Maybank was represented by Tengku Nazihah Hanis Tengku Abd Nawawi.
© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd