A business investment went wrong. Can the payment be claimed back as a loan?

Was the payment a loan or investment? When a business venture fails, a payment made between the people involved may become the subject of a very different story. One party says it was connected to an investment. The other says it was a loan that must be repaid.

Case: Tseu Fui Loong v Optimax Healthcare Services Sdn Bhd & Anor
Court of Appeal | 9 September 2026

In this case, the Court of Appeal overturned an order requiring repayment of RM500,000. The documents showed that the payment settled an investment-related debt, rather than creating the loan alleged by the claimants.

How did the dispute arise?

Tseu Fui Loong held a majority stake in a timber company in the Solomon Islands. He entered into an investment agreement with Tan Boon Hock and two other business associates. Tan agreed to acquire shares for RM1 million.

The investment subsequently failed. Tseu’s case was that the parties agreed to a 50% refund arrangement. One investor, Lim Teck Onn, had already paid RM1 million and was to receive RM500,000 back.

Tan, however, had not paid his own agreed RM1 million investment. Under the revised arrangement, Tseu directed Tan to pay RM500,000 directly to Lim to settle Tan’s outstanding investment-related obligation. Tan made that payment.

Tan and Optimax later sued Tseu, alleging that the RM500,000 was a loan advanced to him. The Sessions Court accepted the claim, and the High Court upheld that decision.

Loan or investment: why did the Court of Appeal disagree?

The Court examined the investment agreement alongside the emails, payment records, meeting documents and the parties’ conduct. These showed that the investment arrangement had been acted upon. Tan had also received investment returns.

The absence of a later formal share sale agreement did not justify disregarding that evidence or treating the existing investment agreement as merely a non-binding expression of interest.

A WhatsApp message referring to returning RM500,000 had been relied on as an admission of the alleged loan. The Court found that the message had been taken out of context. Tseu’s explanation, the surrounding correspondence and the investment records had to be considered together. A separate BlackBerry message concerned a different transaction altogether.

The Court allowed Tseu’s appeal, set aside the decisions below and awarded RM50,000 in costs.

What should business partners take note of?

Before transferring money, record what the payment is for. If it is a loan, identify the borrower and agreed repayment terms. If it is an investment, record what the investor receives and whether any repayment obligation has been agreed.

Take particular care when someone asks you to pay a third party. Confirm in writing whose obligation the payment settles, whether it reduces an existing debt, and whether anyone must reimburse you. A transfer receipt proves that money moved; it may not explain why.

Where several ventures involve the same people, keep separate records for each transaction. If payments are offset against amounts owed under another arrangement, record the calculation and obtain confirmation from those involved.

If a dispute arises, preserve the complete message threads, agreements and bank records. A selected screenshot may give a different impression from the full conversation. Before responding to a repayment demand, check the transaction history so that your reply accurately reflects what was agreed.

The failure of an investment does not, by itself, turn a payment into a loan. Whether repayment can be demanded depends on the parties’ actual agreement and the evidence supporting it.

Share this article