Concede? No, they'll stay on to fight

By Leong Ching
January 13, 2007

THE lawyers of at least three of the four defendants are ready to battle on.

Mr Chia Boon Teck, the lawyer for former NKF chairman Richard Yong and former treasurer Loo Say San, told The New Paper last night: 'Tomorrow, we will be rebutting the plaintiff's opening statement.'

Any possibility of giving in?

'No,' said Mr Chia flatly.

On Wednesday, Mr Durai caved in and stepped out of the ring.

He and four others are being sued by the new board of the NKF for breach of duties towards NKF as directors and fiduciaries.

The trial was originally scheduled to run for eight weeks.

However, the proceedings may be shortened, with four defendants left - Mr Yong, Mr Loo, as well as former NKF director Matilda Chua and Mr Pharis Aboobacker, a business partner of Mr Durai.

What will they do?

The New Paper tried to contact the two lawyers, since Mr Pharis Aboobacker has not appointed a lawyer to act for him.

Ms Chua is represented by Mr Cheah Kok Lim from Ang and Partners, who could not be contacted yesterday.

NKF's lawyer, Senior Counsel K Shanmugam, said that Mr Durai's decision to concede was relevant to how he would carry on the case.

'It helps to the extent that we have something which helps us prove our case,' he said.
He declined to comment on whether his game plan has changed. All he would say was: 'It would be interesting to run through their defences now.'

Mr Leong Yung Chang, a lawyer who has been observing the case closely, agreed.
He added: 'I think Durai did the clever thing.'

He noted that much has already been aired in public and people have made their own judgments.

'Rather than have more evidence come out in a public arena, might as well concede and fight the assessment of damages.'

Mr Leong, who works in Veritas Law Corporation, said that such assessment is usually done in chambers and not in open court.

'Of course, NKF could apply for the assessment to be done in open court - I won't be surprised if they do,' Mr Leong added.

Another lawyer, who declined to be named, wondered if Mr Durai conceded because he did not want to take the stand.

NO ESCAPE
Could it be he didn't want a repeat of the experience during his defamation suit against SPH, where he was grilled in court by SPH's lawyer, Mr Davinder Singh?

But there is no escape because the remaining defendants could very well ask the court to order him to get on the stand again, the lawyer noted.

So what is the defence likely to do?

Two things have already been hinted at during the small exchanges between Mr Shanmugam and the lawyer for Mr Durai, Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah, in the first two days of the trial.

For example, Mr Chelva conceded that it was Mr Durai who signed the credit card, which recorded spending of more than $2.3 million over eight years.

But he hinted that Mr Durai was perhaps not the only person whose expenses went on the card.
Could the others have had a hand in spending the money too?

It is understood that NKF's lawyers will not go after Mr Durai to recover his share of these credit card expenses because he conceded judgment before the statement of claims had been amended. So this means that the $2.3m spending, if recoverable, will be from Mr Loo, Mr Yong and Ms Chua.

Second, Mr Durai's computer. Mr Chelva conceded that some of the e-mails which had been forensically recovered had been deleted by someone using Mr Durai's password.

He was very careful in his phrasing. Could the person be someone other than Mr Durai himself?
These are questions which are likely to surface as the three defendants press on with their case.