-16--
were made in very similar circumstances to the Carrian loans. But the absence
or disappearance of the loan applications themselves which would enable the
court to assess the bank's compliance with their so called practice, is highly
prejudicial to me. These and other related documents would strongly contradict
the Crown's case against me.
of Maminco Sdn
42. As an example, I refer to the minutes of the special meeting of the BBMB
Board on the 3rd. July 1981. It can be seen that the Board considered and
Bhd.
for a secured approved the application, inter alia,
overdraft of M$65 million, and a secured overdraft of £7 million for the
purpose of working capital. At the Board meeting on 5th. January 1982, the
Board approved a letter of guarantee of. M$75 million to the Maminco company
with no apparent provision for security. During that same meeting, the Board
approved yet another application for Maminco for a call loan in the sum of
US$26 million, a secured overdraft in the sum of £70 million and a secured
overdraft in the sum of M$240 million. It is briefly stated that the security
is "against deposit of ..equivalent value of each drawdown to be placed at our
Butterworth and London branches". Finally, at a special meeting of the Board
on 7th. September 1983, it approved a further application for Maminco for a
loan of US$35 million (to be provided equally by Morgan Guaranty Trust company
and BBMB), with no stated provision
provision for security. The loan applications
produced are only those considered by Loans Committee A : but the relevant
loans which concern me are missing.
:
43. I now turn to the Board and management papers which are missing. The
Board papers comprised an integral part and are indeed the basis of the
meetings of the Board of Directors, as can be confiremd, as in for an example,
the minutes of the Board meeting on 9th November 1981 which I have earlier
16