TNAG-2653-FCO40-3846-Extradition-cases-from-the-UK-and-France-to-Hong-Kong-Lorrai-1992 — Page 56

}

(

MAY 14 '92 19:45 CLIFFORD CHANCE HK 852 8104708

36.

9

P.10

M. Monnet agreed to meet us again at the end of March at the conclusion of "Osman" proceedings in the Divisional Court in UK. By that time he would have read witness statements.

37.

M. Monnet said that the evidence should probably be in the form of witness statements in order to satisfy the French Courts of Saniman's involvement in the fraud.

38.

39.

M. Monnet would not guarantee a result in our favour but thought that we should commence fresh proceedings in the light of what he had been told. He also felt that the facts provided that we had real evidence of Saniman's Involvement, would seem to constitute to his mind, abus de conflance in French law. Monnet was of the view that there were now new matters that had not been before the Court in the original request. To that extent the Court had been misinformed as it did not have material matters before. These matters, he said, were clearly important to its consideration and should have been before it. He advised on this basis we would be allowed a fresh

request.

We returned to Siméon, Monquet & Borde & Associes where we assembled the witness statements and exhibits with their certified translations:-

(i)

Jafaar;

(ii)

Lai Ming Kong;

(iii)

Alice Lee

(iv) Nawawi;

(v) Asim Bin Dimas;

(vi) Au Fan Mei Ling;

С € € €

(vii)

George Cathels

(viii) Various letters of resignations from the directors of BMFL and