Horizon Towers suit to proceed

Printable View

25-02-10, 01:08
mr funny

Horizon Towers suit to proceed

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_494628.html

Feb 24, 2010

Horizon Towers suit to proceed

By K.C. Vijayan

MINORITY owners have had a key victory in yet another court fight over the failed $500 million Horizon Towers en-bloc deal.

An assistant registrar in the High Court on Wednesday threw out a bid by two former members of the sales committee to halt an action against them by the owners.

The three sets of minority owners are suing the two - committee chairman Arjun Samtani and member Tan Kah Gee - over costs incurred when they tried to block the collective sale.

They want to be reimbursed for more than $800,000. This includes the cost of hiring lawyers to advise them and other administrative costs.

The sum is expected to be partially offset when the costs awarded to the owners by the Court of Appeal last year after the en-bloc deal was quashed, are assessed.

The owners argue that both committee members were 'key players in the process leading up to the commencement, facilitation, management and finalisation of the collective sale process', according to court documents.
25-02-10, 01:14
proud owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr funny

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_494628.html

Feb 24, 2010

Horizon Towers suit to proceed

By K.C. Vijayan

MINORITY owners have had a key victory in yet another court fight over the failed $500 million Horizon Towers en-bloc deal.

An assistant registrar in the High Court on Wednesday threw out a bid by two former members of the sales committee to halt an action against them by the owners.

The three sets of minority owners are suing the two - committee chairman Arjun Samtani and member Tan Kah Gee - over costs incurred when they tried to block the collective sale.

They want to be reimbursed for more than $800,000. This includes the cost of hiring lawyers to advise them and other administrative costs.

The sum is expected to be partially offset when the costs awarded to the owners by the Court of Appeal last year after the en-bloc deal was quashed, are assessed.

The owners argue that both committee members were 'key players in the process leading up to the commencement, facilitation, management and finalisation of the collective sale process', according to court documents.

these minority owners are powerful ..
they may be doing what they think is the right thing .. but no one dare touch Horizon tower ever again ..

they can live there till the building collapses .. or the 99yr is up .. and becomes ZERO value ..
25-02-10, 09:11
mogyi

Quote:

Originally Posted by proud owner

these minority owners are powerful ..
they may be doing what they think is the right thing .. but no one dare touch Horizon tower ever again ..

they can live there till the building collapses .. or the 99yr is up .. and becomes ZERO value ..

i completely agreed... i would look at leonie gardens or leonie towers etc
rather than to even consider horizon tower due to the domestic politics which hinder the harmony of the estate. (tho every estate have their nonsense too). I guess the value would have suffer too perhaps
25-02-10, 13:24
EBD

Quote:

Originally Posted by proud owner

these minority owners are powerful ..
they may be doing what they think is the right thing .. but no one dare touch Horizon tower ever again ..

they can live there till the building collapses .. or the 99yr is up .. and becomes ZERO value ..

I believe that is what they want. I think owner occupiers in D9 have enough money elsewhere to not worry about their home value.

I was considering buying a unit there for my own stay, but not sure if I would be buying over the legal problems from the seller. Nice place though, very big apartments.

Anyhow good for them for sticking up for themselves.
25-02-10, 21:39
proud owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by EBD

I believe that is what they want. I think owner occupiers in D9 have enough money elsewhere to not worry about their home value.

I was considering buying a unit there for my own stay, but not sure if I would be buying over the legal problems from the seller. Nice place though, very big apartments.

Anyhow good for them for sticking up for themselves.

does anyone know that reporter who interviewed that singer wife, pastor husband who lived there ?

they were interviewed when it was enbloced ..

should interview them again and ask how they feel about the whole saga ...
25-02-10, 21:55
Reporter

Quote:

Originally Posted by proud owner, 25 February 2010 10.39 pm

does anyone know that reporter who interviewed that singer wife, pastor husband who lived there ?

they were interviewed when it was enbloced ..

should interview them again and ask how they feel about the whole saga ...

I think the reporter was from The New Paper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AsiaOne

http://www.asiaone.com/a1media/site/...op_a1_home.gif
Singer Ho Yeow Sun and pastor husband to reap $2.3M in en bloc sale
Couple is likely to get this windfall from their Horizon Towers condo.
AsiaOne
Janice Wong
Monday, 9 April 2007

http://www.asiaone.com/a1news/pics/2...story17_1a.jpg

Local singer Ho Yeow Sun and her husband, Reverend Kong Hee, will likely receive a $2.32 million bonaza from the proposed en bloc sale of their upmarket condo home in Leonie Hill, which they bought in 2000.

The 210-unit Horizon Towers is applying to be sold to a consortium in the next 2 weeks.

Given that 83% of the owners, including Ms Sun and Rev Kong, have agreed to the sale, the deal is likely to go through, unless the minority owners of 34 units succeed in blocking it. Those resisting the deal include Far East Land & Housing Development Company which owns six units.

The law requires consensus from at least 80% of shareowners before a sale can go through.

Horizon Towers, occupying a prime residential site off Orchard Road, will be sold to Hotel Properties and 2 foreign funds for $500 million. It will be the 2nd largest en bloc transaction in terms of absolute dollar quantum, after Gillman Heights, which is in the suburbs.

The price reflects a unit land price of about $810 to $820 psf of potential gross floor area, inclusive of an estimated $45 million to $50 million lease upgrading premium to top up the 204,742 sqft site's lease to 99 years from a remaining term of about 71 years.

http://www.asiaone.com/a1news/pics/2...story17_1b.jpg

Ms Ho and Rev Kong, who is City Harvest Church founder, have been living there with their 2½-year-old son, Dayan, since 2000. They moved into the 28-year-old condo unit after selling their 5-room Tampines HDB flat.

Rev Kong told The New Paper in 2000 that they like the privacy that the personal lift lobby provides, as well as the spacious 2,650 sqft apartment, which has 2 living rooms, 4 bedrooms and a compact kitchen.

He declined to say how much he paid for the apartment, but a similar unit was sold for $1.1 million in 2004, according to URA. Records show that they took a bank loan and dipped into their CPF. Rev Kong said that he made a handsome profit from the sale of their Tampines flat which went into settling the downpayment.

"We bought our flat for $127,000 and sold it at $420,000, so when we moved in to the condo unit, it cost me nothing," he told TNP.

Although the exterior of the apartment looks rather aged, being almost 28 years old, the interior of their home was described as being straight out of a glossy magazine, complete with a walk-in wardrobe and designer furniture.

After the en bloc, the site can be redeveloped into a new condo with a plot ratio of 3.2828. This means the site can be redeveloped into a condo with a gross floor area of more than 670,000 sqft - sufficient for about 375 units averaging 1,800 sqft. The break-even cost for a new upmarket condo project on the site is estimated to be about $1,350 psf.
25-02-10, 22:03
proud owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reporter

I think the reporter was from The New Paper.

ah yes ...

what a name ... Kong Hee Fatt Choy ... he made enuff money ..en bloc or not
25-02-10, 22:17
mr funny

Horizon Towers lawsuits headed for trial

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/...74101,00.html?

Published February 25, 2010

Horizon Towers lawsuits headed for trial

High Court dismisses striking out action by 2 former sales committee members

By MICHELLE QUAH

(SINGAPORE) The latest legal tussle involving Horizon Towers looks set to go into full swing, with the High Court having dismissed the action by the two defendants to strike out the lawsuits filed against them.

This means the court will hear the claims brought by three sets of minority owners against the two former sales committee members - unless the defendants succeed in appealing against yesterday's decision.

BT understands that the first defendant - former sales committee chairman, Arjun Samtani - will appeal the High Court decision, while the second defendant, Tan Kah Gee, is still deliberating if he should appeal.

The High Court yesterday also ordered both Mr Samtani and Mr Tan to jointly bear the costs of the striking-out application and the court hearing - amounting to a total of $6,000.

The minority owners are suing the two former sales committee members to reclaim close to $1 million in legal and administrative costs which they say they incurred during the lengthy fight to keep their homes.

The en bloc sale of Horizon Towers was a saga that dragged out for more than two years, and involved several High Court and Strata Titles Board hearings. The Court of Appeal eventually decided in April last year that the deal could not go through because the development's sales committee had failed in its duty.

The Court of Appeal had ordered the bulk of costs to be borne by the development's potential buyer, Hotel Properties Ltd (HPL), and its majority owners.

But three sets of minority owners, represented by Kannan Ramesh of Tan Kok Quan Partnership, are now seeking compensation for the sums not covered by the Court of Appeal judgment. The three sets of owners are seeking between $117,000 and $370,000 in costs - making for a total claim of more than $800,000.

The minorities say they were made to defend their homes against an en bloc process actuated by a lack of good faith on the part of the sales committee, and had to spend much for their effort.

They said Mr Samtani and Mr Tan were 'key players in the process leading up to the commencement, facilitation, management and finalisation of the collective sale process'.

In his defence, Mr Samtani - represented by N Sreenivasan of Straits Law Practice -- said he was not alone in driving the sale process. He said 'each and every member of the SC (sales committee) played an equally important role' and that he 'did not have any special powers' that could influence the committee's decisions.

Mr Samtani also claimed that the committee 'followed up on all expressions of offer' for Horizon Towers and that it received no offer better than HPL's at the relevant time. He said the committee was advised by its lawyers to proceed with the HPL offer.

Mr Tan, represented by Senior Counsel Tan Cheng Han and Ian Lim of TSMP Law Corporation, said he was 'not a key player' and cited various correspondence and minutes of sales committee meetings which he said showed that he did not play a major role in the various aspects of the collective sale.

Mr Tan also said that the sales committee did not seriously consider an alternative offer made at the time by a Vineyard Holdings, as it had 'questioned the credibility of the expression of interest from Vineyard and their level of seriousness given that Vineyard was a Hong Kong company that was not well known and its lawyers were not from a Singaporean firm, but from a small Malaysian law firm'.

He claims he suggested waiting for a higher offer, but that the majority of the sales committee did not agree. He said the sales committee genuinely felt they would not get a better offer than the one by HPL, and that they had been advised by their lawyers to accept the offer.

Mr Tan had also sought to strike out the minorities' suits against him and Mr Samtani, saying that the entire remedy sought by the minorities was already dealt with by the Court of Appeal last April, when it decided on how it would award costs to the various parties. But the High Court chose to dismiss this application yesterday.

The defendants have 14 days to submit their appeal.
25-02-10, 22:30
mr funny

http://www.straitstimes.com/Money/St...ry_494753.html

Feb 25, 2010

High Court okays Horizon Towers lawsuit

By K.C. Vijayan

MINORITY owners have had a key victory in yet another court fight over the failed $500 million Horizon Towers en-bloc deal.

An assistant registrar in the High Court yesterday threw out a bid by two former members of the sales committee to halt an action against them by the owners.

The three sets of minority owners are suing the two - ex-committee chairman Arjun Samtani and ex-member Tan Kah Gee - over costs incurred when they tried to block the collective sale.

They want to be reimbursed for more than $800,000 in costs. This includes the cost of hiring lawyers to advise them and other administrative costs.

The sum is expected to be partially offset when the costs awarded to the owners by the Court of Appeal last year, after the en-bloc deal was quashed, are assessed.

The owners argue that both committee members were 'key players in the process leading up to the commencement, facilitation, management and finalisation of the collective sale process', according to court documents.

Lawyers for the committee members countered that the minority owners' suit should be struck off as the action was 'scandalous, frivolous (and) vexatious'. They also pointed out that the Court of Appeal awarded costs last April in a case that dealt with all outstanding issues of reimbursement.

But the minority owners argued that the new case is different from the one settled last year.

In that case last year, costs were awarded for the minority owners' conduct in opposing the proposed sale by the consenting majority owners.

The present action is different as it is based on what they claim is the lack of good faith in the collective sale deal struck by Mr Arjun and Mr Tan as members of the sales committee.

They allege that this 'lack of good faith' resulted in minority owners having to put in a great deal of effort and spend a lot of money to oppose the sale.

In effect, they claim there was a breach of fiduciary duties and they want to be compensated for the costs from the resulting damages.

Mr Kannan Ramesh, who is acting for the owners, said in his submissions: 'The causes of action in both cases are appreciably different.'

At a closed-door hearing yesterday, assistant registrar Leong Weng Tat ruled in a reserved judgement that the suit by the minority owners should proceed.

Mr Arjun and Mr Tan, represented by Mr N. Sreenivasan and senior counsel Tan Cheng Han respectively, can appeal to the High Court against the decision, otherwise the case will advance to a full hearing. Lawyers say either way, the case may eventually go to the Court of Appeal.

The Horizon Towers collective sale spanned more than two years and involved two Strata Titles Board hearings and two High Court hearings before being thrown out by the Court of Appeal last year.