MAY 14 '92 19:58 CLIFFORD CHANCE HK 852 8104708
P.7
91.
92.
93.
94.
24
not as Saniman had portrayed it to the Court on the earlier request. He suggested that the qualification of offences broke into two separate classes:-
(1)
(ii)
abus de confiance essentially dealing with the misuse of funds by their application;
escroquerie and the complicity of Saniman essentially dealing with the deception on the bank.
We discussed the mechanics of international banking finance and in particular the significance of letters of comfort and inter-bank lending. He said he did not fully comprehend how the loans from BMFL to Carrian were financed. After some discussion he said he now understood the position.
M. Chauvy said that we should qualify the US$138 million advance and the US$100 million advance as escroquerie in which Saniman was involved by way of complicity. He said George Tan had clearly obtained fraudulent loans from BMFL with the help of Saniman. He felt that the funds in relation to both those advances were disguised as loans to several separate and unrelated corporate borrowers. He said in his view these borrower companies were merely "straw" companies.
Chauvy suggested we should include both the loan applications and approvals and furthermore the US$292 million loan agreement and the false schedule. He said the new warrant should include different charges that reflected the misleading nature of these documents. He felt these were factors a French Court could readily identify and relate to as they were tangible matters and related to banking documents.
Chauvy thought it was helpful that in this request both BBMB and BMFL were shown to have suffered loss.
ز
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.