Is the guarantor who claimed that his signatures were forged able to void the guarantee provided to a bank?
BANK KERJASAMA RAKYAT MALAYSIA SDN BHD v. HONG VOON CHUNG  1 LNS 250
- Instyle Furniture Industries Sdn Bhd (“Borrower”) was granted various Islamic financing facilities (“Facilities”) by Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia Berhad (“Bank”).
- Chong Voon Chung (“Chong”) was 1 of the 3 guarantors for the Facilities, who were all directors of the Borrower.
- The Borrower breached the terms of the Facilities when they failed to make payment in respect of the Facilities.
- In the High Court, the Bank sued the borrower and guarantors for payment of the Facilities.
- Chong’s defence was that he did not sign the “Joint and Several Guarantee Agreement” and the “Acknowledgement By The Guarantors” (“Guarantee”) and that his signatures on these security documents to secure the Facilities were forged (“Impugned Signatures”).
- The High Court found that the Impugned Signatures and Chong’s signature on his witness statement filed in court bore striking resemblance and was not forged and therefore found in favour of the Bank.
- Chong appealed to the Court of Appeal.
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION – APPEAL DISMISSED!
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by Chong in respect of the Impugned Signatures. The court agreed with the findings of the High Court in that Chong had failed to discharge the burden of proving the Impugned Signatures are not his signatures and that his signatures were forged. The court found that that signature which appears in the Guarantee is in fact Chong’s signature.