Sep 29, 2007 
Hearing delayed as judge has to decide if HPL, fresh
group of owners can take part <!-- Author -->
By Tan Hui Yee, Housing
Correspondent
<!-- more than 7 paragraphs --><!-- story content :
start -->
IT HAD all the elements of a classic courtroom drama - big bucks
at stake, anxious owners and more lawyers than you could poke a
stick at - but yesterday's Horizon Towers hearing was far from a
stirring showdown.
The owners had gone to the High Court in a bid to overturn a
Strata Titles Board (STB) ruling that aborted the collective sale
of their Leonie Hill estate.
But lengthy argument involving a scrum of legal eagles - at
least four senior counsel and six law firms turned up - over who
could actually be involved in the proceedings threw a hefty spanner
in the works.
Two groups wanted to be included but four other parties
protested.
After about three hours of legal to and fro, Justice Choo Han
Teck is expected to rule on Monday whether these groups can take
part, which will mean the actual appeal hearing can start.
It centres on the STB's Aug 3 ruling that the sale application
for the 210-unit condo was defective due to procedural errors.
<!-- show media links starting at 7th para -->The majority
owners who signed the sale deal, represented by senior counsel
Chelva Rajah from Tan, Rajah & Cheah, want that decision
overturned.
But two other parties said they wanted to have their say as
well.
One is a group
of individuals - including pop star Ho Yeow Sun and her husband,
Kong Hee - who own 13 units. All signed the sale deal and said they
wanted to participate in the hearing to ensure the sale goes
through.
The other is the consortium led by Hotel Properties (HPL) that
signed the $500 million deal in February to buy the estate.
It maintains that the appeal outcome could affect the breach of
contract suit it filed against the majority owners last month
claiming lost profits of $800 million to $1 billion from the
botched deal.
It had that suit adjourned on Thursday after the owners extended
the sale deadline to Dec 11 but it is still 'alive'.
Its lawyer, Mr K. Shanmugam from Allen & Gledhill, argued
that if the court ruled that the STB was wrong, it could be used by
majority owners to 'white-wash' their alleged breach of
contract.
'We, the purchaser, are the only real parties interested in
seeing this contract through,' he said.
This rankled Mr Rajah, who argued that the majority owners were
trying to get an appeal against the STB decision in order to fulfil
the contract.
The consortium's application irked the group of more than 30
owners at court. At one point, murmurs of discontent rose from the
gallery when Mr Shanmugam rose to speak.
Meanwhile, three separate lawyers for the minority owners who
did not sign the sale agreement argued against the two groups
joining the proceedings. They said it was unnecessary and would
raise costs for everyone.
An owner, 53-year-old real estate developer Victor Ow, said
later that he had not expected things to get so complicated.
'All of us like to be treated fairly...We shouldn't, as owners,
be known in the market as greedy and as villains.'
Wonder if they used the church fund to buy the condo.
