Notice Concerning the Filing of a Lawsuit against a Subsidiary
Feb 2, 2018
J Trust Co., Ltd.
A lawsuit (the “Lawsuit”) was filed against the Company’s subsidiary, JTRUST ASIA PTE.LTD. (“JTRUST ASIA”). The details are as follows.
The Company also has confirmed that, in addition to JTRUST ASIA, the following parties are named as defendants in the Lawsuit.
||PT Bank JTrust Indonesia Tbk.
||PT JTrust Investments Indonesia
||Several executive officers of the Company and its subsidiaries (JTRUST ASIA, Bank JTrust and JTII)
||Lembaga Penjamin Simpanan (Indonesia Deposit Insurance Corporation) and several of its executive officers (including former executive officers)
||Saab Financial (Bermuda) Ltd., alleged Bermuda company (in liquidation), Federal Bank of Lebanon Sal, alleged Lebanon company, and several individuals, alleged owners and executive officers of these companies
||FBME Ltd., alleged Cayman Island company and its alleged subsidiary FBME Card Services Ltd.
1. Courthouse and Filing Date of the Lawsuit
(1) Courthouse The Supreme Court of Mauritius (Commercial Division)
(2) Filing Date September 22, 2017 (Date of the plaint)
The Company has been confirming with local legal counsel whether it can be said that the Lawsuit has been filed, in light of the manner of the plaintiffs’ sending the plaint, the court proceedings in Mauritius, and others. We have received, on January 23, 2018, an answer from local legal counsel to the effect that it can be said that the Lawsuit has been filed in Mauritius. Therefore, we hereby announce the filing of the Lawsuit.
2. Overview of the plaintiffs who filed the Lawsuit
||(i) First Global Funds Limited PCC
(ii) Weston International Asset Recovery Company Limited
(iii) Weston Capital Advisors, Inc.
(iv) Weston International Asset Recovery Corporation, Inc.
(v) Weston International Capital Limited
||Ebene, Republic of Mauritius
With regard to party (iii), while the plaint states that its address is in Ebene, Republic of Mauritius, according to our legal counsel, its registration in the Republic of Mauritius could not be confirmed. Only its registration in Delaware, USA, has been confirmed.
||Title and name of representative
3. Overview of the Lawsuit and amount of claims
(1) Cause and details of the Lawsuit
We received from local legal counsel an explanation that while the details of the plaintiffs’ claims are highly uncertain, their claims are summarized as follows.
||The plaintiffs allege that JTRUST ASIA, JTII, the Individual Defendants and LPS conspired to obstruct the payment allegedly due to the plaintiffs under the 2015 Mauritian Judgment*. The plaintiffs request that these defendants be enjoined, jointly and in solido, to the 2015 Mauritian Judgment and the Mareva Injunction subsequently issued by the Mauritius court, in relation to the same judgment.
||The plaintiffs allege that all the defendants conspired to commit money laundering etc., with the intention to defraud the plaintiffs, which caused damages to the plaintiffs, as the creditors of the Saab Parties. The plaintiffs are therefore claiming damages against all the defendants.
||The plaintiffs allege that LPS defrauded the plaintiffs to obstruct the acquisition of Bank JTrust by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are claiming damages against the Company, its subsidiaries, Bank JTrust, JTRUST ASIA and JTII, the Individual Defendants and LPS.
||The plaintiffs allege that they have incurred significant costs in trying to recover the 2015 Mauritian Judgment and have lost investment opportunities. The plaintiffs are claiming compensation for damages against the Company, its subsidiaries, Bank JTrust, JTRUST ASIA and JTII, the Individual Defendants and LPS.
||The plaintiffs allege that the arbitration proceedings between Bank JTrust and the Saab and FBME Parties were fraudulent and the settlement subsequently paid by Bank JTrust to the Saab and FBME parties is illicit. The plaintiffs are claiming damages from all defendants for being defrauded out of this settlement.
||The plaintiffs are claiming for Global Mareva Injunctions against all the defendants.
(2) Amount of subject matter of suit
(Approx. JPY 13.9 billion)
(Approx. JPY 13.9 billion)
(Approx. JPY 10.2 billion)
(Approx. JPY 5.4 billion)
(Approx. JPY 800 million)
|Up to the amount of USD 400,000,000 (Approx. JPY 43.5 billion) against the Company, its subsidiaries, Bank JTrust, JTRUST ASIA and JTII, the Individual Defendants and LPS
Up to the amount of USD 150,000,000 (Approx. JPY 16.3 billion) against FBME Parties and Saab Parties
||Converted at the rate as of January 31, 2018 (USD 1 = JPY 108.79).
||While it is not clear, the plaint includes statements to the effect that the plaintiffs are claiming interests, costs, or an unspecified amount of compensation, in addition to the amount above for each claim.
4. Overview of the Company’s subsidiary
||JTRUST ASIA PTE.LTD.
||Address of the Head Office
||Republic of Singapore
||Title and Name of Representative
||Nobuyoshi Fujisawa, Managing Director and CEO
||Investment Business and Management Support Services
||SGD 375 million (Approx. JPY 29.8 billion)
(as of December 31, 2017)
||Date of Establishment
||October 7, 2013
||Major Shareholder and Shareholding Ratio
||J Trust Co., Ltd.
5. Future Prospects
The plaintiffs in the Lawsuit and other Weston-related companies (the “Weston Entities”) have made claims against the Company and its group companies in the past. However, we contested such claims arguing that those claims were unreasonable and against the fact, and as a result, in October 2016, the Tokyo District Court rendered a declaratory judgment that the Company had no obligations alleged by the Weston Entities in the 2015 Mauritian Judgment, and this judgment became final and binding**. Also, in the US, the District Court for the Southern District of New York ordered Weston Capital Advisors, Inc. to return approximately USD 3.6 million to Bank JTrust. After Weston failed to return the funds, the US District Court, based on the motion by Bank J Trust, held Weston Capital Advisors, Inc., its affiliates (including the plaintiffs in the Lawsuit) and Mr. John R. Liegey (the representative thereof), taken as a whole, in contempt of court and imposed escalating fines on them***.
JTRUST ASIA recognizes that the allegations by the plaintiffs in the Lawsuit are unreasonable and groundless, and have no basis. Also, JTRUST ASIA is of the view that the Mauritian court has no jurisdiction over any of the claims by the plaintiffs in the Lawsuit.
The Company, its group companies and the Individual Defendants named as defendants in the Lawsuit other than JTRUST ASIA recognize that the allegations by the plaintiffs in the Lawsuit are unreasonable and groundless, and that the allegations have no basis, as well. They are also of the view that the Mauritian court has no jurisdiction over the claims in the Lawsuit. Also, they are of the view that no judgment to be rendered by the Mauritian court will be valid against those companies nor individuals, as, in the first place, no duly performed service has been effected on such defendants in their located jurisdictions.
By proceeding with the Lawsuit, JTRUST ASIA will contest the plaintiffs’ claims.
At present, the Company considers that this matter has no impact on the financial results of the Company. The Company will disclose information regarding the Lawsuit’s status and its impact on the financial results promptly, following occurrences that warrant disclosure.
||Please see our press release, “Notice of Filing of Complaint for Declaratory Judgment regarding Absence of Obligations” issued on August 10, 2015.
||Please see our press release, “(Release Update) Final Judgment on Declaratory Judgment regarding Absence of Obligations” issued on October 28, 2016.
||Please see our press release, “Press Release by Subsidiary in Indonesia” issued on September 11, 2015.