JV Developers seeking RM13 mln in damages
KOTA
KINABALU: JV Developers are asking for RM13 million as damages for
settlement of Koperasi Pusaka (Penampang) Bhd’s wrong termination of
their joint-venture agreements.
Prominent developer Dato’ Sri Alex Kong, the managing director of JV Developers, namely Hubah Sdn Bhd, Konkamaju Sdn Bhd and Aggasf Properties Sdn Bhd, yesterday said the offer of settlement to Koperasi Pusaka followed a decision by the Federal Court in September last year to award damages to JV Developers.
He hopes that Koperasi Pusaka would seriously consider the offer of RM13 million that was compiled by a registered valuer engaged by JV Developers.
“If the court is asked to assess the damages, I believe Koperasi Pusaka will have to pay an even larger sum as damages to JV Developers,” said Kong when met by reporters yesterday.
Back in September 2013, the protracted legal tussle between Koperasi Pusaka and JV Developers finally came to an end after the Federal Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal brought by Koperasi Pusaka.
The registered cooperative society had been engaged in litigation with JV Developers arising from Koperasi Pusaka’s termination of various agreements and power of attorney signed with the cooperative during the period from 1992 to 2002.
Previously on May 12, 2012, the Court of Appeal found that the Koperasi Pusaka board of directors had been authorised and granted the full mandates in several general meetings to enter into joint venture agreements with the developers.
This authorisation was repeatedly briefed by the cooperative chairman to all members at two separate general meetings of Koperasi Pusaka held on Feb 28, 1993 and March 7, 1993.
The Court of Appeal also found that the transactions had been entered into for the benefit of the cooperative.
The agreements had been duly discharged by performance and Koperasi Pusaka had obtained all its entitlements under various agreements from the joint-venture parties, and the Court of Appeal ruled that all those agreements were valid and that the cooperative was bound by them.
Evidence adduced during the trial showed that Koperasi Pusaka had terminated the various agreements and power of attorney with the joint-venture parties on the alleged ground that there had been non-compliance with the Cooperatives Societies Act 1993 and the by-laws.
In particular, Koperasi Pusaka had sought the return of lands under the various joint-venture agreements.
However, the JV parties’ lawyers argued that Koperasi Pusaka should not be permitted to use its own alleged non-compliance with its own by-laws as engine of fraud or an instrument of injustice against the JV parties especially when the cooperative had received its entitlements under the various agreements.
In its judgement, the Court of Appeal had granted the orders sought by the JV parties and had allowed all the claims by the latter against Koperasi Pusaka.
The claims of the JV parties include damages for wrongful termination of the agreements and power of attorneys by Koperasi Pusaka as well as aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages.
In a statement yesterday, Kong said it had been established in court that members of Koperasi Pusaka and the board members were fully aware of the cooperative’s mandates and decision to enter into the agreements.
“Unfortunately, certain board members chose to pursue a frivolous allegation by withholding their own documentary evidence to claim that there had been no mandate for Koperasi Pusaka to enter into the various agreements and power of attorneys,” he added.
Kong reckoned that the cooperative’s present board of directors should verify the various decisions made by the cooperative that were properly recorded in its own minutes of meetings before proceeding to terminate those agreements.
“Regretfully, the actions by these board members have resulted in losses to Koperasi Pusaka through wasted legal expenditure and damages awarded by the court.
“I hope that the board members who had made the decision to terminate the agreements wrongfully will be mindful that their actions have seriously caused Koperasi Pusaka harm and will take steps to minimise the harm to the cooperative,” he added.
Prominent developer Dato’ Sri Alex Kong, the managing director of JV Developers, namely Hubah Sdn Bhd, Konkamaju Sdn Bhd and Aggasf Properties Sdn Bhd, yesterday said the offer of settlement to Koperasi Pusaka followed a decision by the Federal Court in September last year to award damages to JV Developers.
He hopes that Koperasi Pusaka would seriously consider the offer of RM13 million that was compiled by a registered valuer engaged by JV Developers.
“If the court is asked to assess the damages, I believe Koperasi Pusaka will have to pay an even larger sum as damages to JV Developers,” said Kong when met by reporters yesterday.
Back in September 2013, the protracted legal tussle between Koperasi Pusaka and JV Developers finally came to an end after the Federal Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal brought by Koperasi Pusaka.
The registered cooperative society had been engaged in litigation with JV Developers arising from Koperasi Pusaka’s termination of various agreements and power of attorney signed with the cooperative during the period from 1992 to 2002.
Previously on May 12, 2012, the Court of Appeal found that the Koperasi Pusaka board of directors had been authorised and granted the full mandates in several general meetings to enter into joint venture agreements with the developers.
This authorisation was repeatedly briefed by the cooperative chairman to all members at two separate general meetings of Koperasi Pusaka held on Feb 28, 1993 and March 7, 1993.
The Court of Appeal also found that the transactions had been entered into for the benefit of the cooperative.
The agreements had been duly discharged by performance and Koperasi Pusaka had obtained all its entitlements under various agreements from the joint-venture parties, and the Court of Appeal ruled that all those agreements were valid and that the cooperative was bound by them.
Evidence adduced during the trial showed that Koperasi Pusaka had terminated the various agreements and power of attorney with the joint-venture parties on the alleged ground that there had been non-compliance with the Cooperatives Societies Act 1993 and the by-laws.
In particular, Koperasi Pusaka had sought the return of lands under the various joint-venture agreements.
However, the JV parties’ lawyers argued that Koperasi Pusaka should not be permitted to use its own alleged non-compliance with its own by-laws as engine of fraud or an instrument of injustice against the JV parties especially when the cooperative had received its entitlements under the various agreements.
In its judgement, the Court of Appeal had granted the orders sought by the JV parties and had allowed all the claims by the latter against Koperasi Pusaka.
The claims of the JV parties include damages for wrongful termination of the agreements and power of attorneys by Koperasi Pusaka as well as aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages.
In a statement yesterday, Kong said it had been established in court that members of Koperasi Pusaka and the board members were fully aware of the cooperative’s mandates and decision to enter into the agreements.
“Unfortunately, certain board members chose to pursue a frivolous allegation by withholding their own documentary evidence to claim that there had been no mandate for Koperasi Pusaka to enter into the various agreements and power of attorneys,” he added.
Kong reckoned that the cooperative’s present board of directors should verify the various decisions made by the cooperative that were properly recorded in its own minutes of meetings before proceeding to terminate those agreements.
“Regretfully, the actions by these board members have resulted in losses to Koperasi Pusaka through wasted legal expenditure and damages awarded by the court.
“I hope that the board members who had made the decision to terminate the agreements wrongfully will be mindful that their actions have seriously caused Koperasi Pusaka harm and will take steps to minimise the harm to the cooperative,” he added.
