KUALA LUMPUR (Aug 5): The High Court has set Aug 12 to deliver its decision on Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's bid to suspend payment of RM67.5 million to a Lebanese jeweller over missing pieces of jewellery.
Judicial Commissioner (JC) Marianne Antoinette Ghani set the date on Wednesday after listening to the parties’ submissions on the stay application.
Rosmah wants a stay on an earlier decision by the High Court in June, which had found her liable for 43 “missing” pieces of jewellery consigned to her by Lebanese jeweller Global Royalty Trading SAL back in 2018.
High Court judge Datuk Quay Chew Soon had ordered Rosmah to pay Global Royalty RM67,461,027.37 and also dismissed her third-party claim against the Inspector General of Police and the government.
Rosmah claims that the jewellery, seized in a raid after the 2018 general elections, were in the possession of the authorities at all material time. If the jewellery were lost, she said the police or the Malaysian government should be made responsible for the losses.
Only one piece of jewellery — from a total of 44 that she had received — was recovered and returned to Global Royalty.
She is appealing Quay's decision and had applied for an interim stay, which was heard before JC Marianne. The JC had dismissed the interim stay on July 20, prompting Rosmah to file the current stay application.
On Wednesday, Rosmah's counsel, Reza Rahim, among others argued that there were circumstances for granting a stay, as his client would be undertaking some risks should she fulfil the payment before her appeal.
"Some assets need to be liquidated, and once done and [if] she succeeds in the appeal, then there is no way for her to get back the assets [in the current form]," he said.
The lawyer argued that the plaintiffs are in Lebanon, which was a non-reciprocal jurisdiction where restitution would be difficult. Reza also argued that should Rosmah be successful in her appeal, the jeweller had not allayed fears that they were financially fit to return the sum to Rosmah.
Reza added that a stay ought to be granted because the amount which Global Royalty is seeking is already “tied up” and preserved in an interim injunction for another case — 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB)'s US$350 million (RM1.6 billion) suit relating to some 11,000 luxury items, namely handbags and jewellery.
In its submissions, Global Royalty's counsel Venothani Rajagopal emphasised that the courts have upheld that “financial hardship, forced liquidation, bankruptcy, and even foreign elements do not justify an unconditional stay”.
She countered that a judgement is still enforceable in Lebanon via common law action on the foreign judgement.
Venothani added that Rosmah had not produced any evidence to support her argument that “restitution would be difficult, impossible, or impracticable”.
Addressing the injunction in the 1MDB case, the lawyer argued that the courts have yet to determine if the items “preserved” belong to Rosmah, or if she is in possession of them.
“Ownership and ultimate entitlement remain disputed.
“Therefore, the plaintiff has absolutely no assurance that those assets will ultimately remain with the defendant or become available to satisfy this judgement.
“[...] An injunction is merely a restraint. It preserves uncertainty. It does not create security,” she argued.