[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: A judge dismissed parts of a request by the Aljunied Hougang City Council (AHTC) to amend its claims against the leaders of the Workers’ Party (WP) and their co-defendants in a multi-million dollar civil lawsuit over their management of the city council.
In an oral trial that WP chief Pritam Singh made available via his Facebook page on Thursday (Aug 27), Judge Kannan Ramesh said it was “important” to note that the city council had requested these amendments only after he rendered his verdict in October 2019.
It found Mr Singh, Aljunied GRC MP Sylvia Lim and former WP Secretary General Low Thia Khiang liable for breaching different types of duties, according to the original claims.
Other defendants in the lawsuits are then-AHTC councilors Chua Zhi Hon and Kenneth Foo Seck Guan, along with managing agent FM Solutions & Services and its director How Weng Fan, who is also acting as her late husband Danny Loh. .
WP leaders and AHTC councilors were tried for breaching duties owed to AHTC and Pasir Ris-Punggol City Council (PRPTC) between 2011 and 2015.
The four contracts they awarded to FMSS without calling for bids were critical to the test, and FMSS leaders rated individuals with conflicts of interest due to the dual roles they had at both AHTC and FMSS.
Another key issue was the “flawed” approval process for payments for services that FMSS provided to AHTC.
However, after the verdict was rendered, AHTC requested to amend its statement of claim in May of this year in ways that increased the amount of damages requested.
Judge Ramesh also noted that AHTC had chosen to present its claims against the defendants separately from PRPTC, rather than consolidate them.
Part of AHTC’s arguments urging the court to grant the requested amendments was that “the purposes of justice” required that the amendments be granted so that its allegations were in line with those of the PRPTC.
“It should be noted that AHTC has not offered an explanation, either in the supporting affidavit or in its submissions, why it did not initially align its allegations with those of PRPTC, and why the request was submitted so late,” Justice said Ramesh.
“Consequently, to the extent that the proposed amendments seek to introduce new causes of action in (the AHTC lawsuit), they should not be allowed.”
READ: AHTC Lawsuit – WP Leaders Oppose Plaintiff’s Offer to Add New Claims, Question Timing and Legal Issues
The amendments that Judge Ramesh rejected include a statement that Mr. Singh, Mr. Chua and Mr. Foo breached their duty of care and skill as fiduciaries and / or duties of care and skill for AHTC.
The judge also rejected an amendment that establishes that the defendants “had the means to know and knew or should have known” certain facts by virtue of their position as elected or appointed members of AHTC, which “would have aroused suspicion and put a prudent man in guard “.
This rejected amendment also stated that the defendants did not investigate the facts and circumstances of the matter or inform AHTC about it or rectify the flaws in the payment system.
However, it did allow some amendments to be made to AHTC’s claims, including a line on when AHTC signed a contract with FMSS without inviting any bids and who had proposed this, and a line on Ms How and her husband breaching their duties of care and skill as fiduciaries and AHTC.
Judge Ramesh instructed the parties to submit cost submissions. The defendants are ready to appeal against the October verdict that finds them responsible, but this has been postponed several times this year and will take place at a later date.
