This article is from the Australian Property Journal archive
SUNLAND has rejected a decision by the Supreme Court of Victoria to dismiss its $14 million claim against Angus Reed, his company Prudentia Investments and Matthew Joyce over the alleged Dubai fraud scandal.
Sunland has also rejected Justice Clyde Croft’s decision to forward his judgement to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission with a request that the Commission consider the corporate governance issues for Sunland and take such further action as considered appropriate.
Sunland’s company secretary Grant Harrison said there are very strong grounds for an appeal and the company intends to pursue it.
Harrison said Sunland absolutely rejects Justice Croft’s grounds for referring his views to ASIC concerning market disclosures on various aspects of the case.
In reaching his judgement to reject the $14 million claim, Justice Croft said it was difficult to quantify the loss and damage Sunland has allegedly suffered because of the contradictory evidence given by David Brown the head of Sunland’s Dubai branch, and chairman Soheil Abedian.
Justice Croft said Sunland did not show evidence in support of its claim for loss and damage on this basis.
“In fact, the evidence as it stands, indicates that it has successfully persuaded the Dubai authorities that it is a “victim” of a fraud perpetrated against it and further, this is the message which it has apparently been disseminating to the world through the ASX releases to which reference has already been made.
“In any event, as submitted against Sunland, any loss or damage to its reputation would not crystallise unless or until there was a ruling in the Dubai courts in relation to the legality or otherwise of the D17 transaction, and a finding in relation to Sunland’s involvement in that transaction,” the Judge said.
“The other aspect of the case, the case in tort, relies on establishing the elements of the tort of deceit. In neither case do communications between defendants, or the defendants and non-parties, to which Sunland was not privy at any relevant time – so which could not affect the impact of any alleged conduct, including representations, on Sunland or influence in any way its reliance or otherwise on such conduct – have any relevance to its case, on either basis.
“The same applies to flows of money or any other conduct which was not within Sunland’s knowledge at the relevant time. Sunland’s attempt to rely on these matters in support of its case is merely another exercise on its part in the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.
“There can be no “joint purpose” or “joint tortfeasors” without first establishing the “purpose” or the “tort”. For the preceding reasons Sunland has failed to establish any base upon which any of the internal communications, subsequent dealings or flows of money could possibly become relevant; either for the purpose of its statute-based case or its case in deceit,” the Judge said.
Sunland launched the legal action in 2009 against Reed, Prudentia and Joyce relating to the purchase by one of Sunland’s subsidiaries of a site, Plot D17 at Dubai Waterfront, from the Dubai Government owned property developer Nakheel in October 2007.
Sunland alleged that Reed and Joyce tricked the company into paying $14 million for Plot D17, which the pair did not have the rights to. These alleged fraud relate to alleged bribery of $DH43 million – in the form of consultancy payments.
Joyce and Marcus Lee remain in Dubai, facing criminal charges. The pair have been held in custody for over three years since March 2009.
When the global financial crisis hit Dubai, the government initiated a crackdown, investigating 20 executives over allegations of corruption and bribery at some of Dubai’s largest construction projects.
Joyce was formerly chief executive of Sydney-based developer St Hilliers and before that, he was the executive general manager of land and housing for Australand. Lee was a former executive of Jones Lang LaSalle Australia.
Property Review
