Sapura Holdings Sdn Bhd (SHSB) director Shahriman Shamsuddin today denied knowing the purpose of a letter of support issued for the benefit of Sapura Resources Bhd (SRB) on May 30 last year.
Testifying under cross-examination in his petition to wind up SHSB, Shahriman acknowledged that the request was made known to SRB’s board by its chief financial officer through an email dated May 27, 2024.
Questioned by S Rabindra, counsel for elder brother Shahril, Shahriman agreed that as managing director of SRB, he “would have been aware” of the request.
Rabindra: Do you agree that Item 2.2 (of a management paper prepared by the CFO) reflects the reason why the letter of support was requested?
Shahriman: I don’t know.
Rabindra: Can I take it that as the managing director (of SRB) and the director of SHSB, the major shareholder, you didn’t know the reason why the letter of support was required. Is that your evidence?
Shahriman: Can you please clarify?
Rabindra: It’s ok. If you can’t answer, then you can’t answer. We will just submit on your inability to answer. Item 3 of the management paper proposed that Jurudata Sdn Bhd (a subsidiary of SRB) would issue the letter of support. Could you confirm that?
Shahriman: (No answer.)
Shown and asked to identify the signed letter of support, Shahriman responded that it had been signed by Shahril.
Asked whether the terms of the letter of support stipulated that Jurudata would not be entitled to demand immediate repayment of the loan in the event of a default, Shahriman said: “I don’t know.”
Rabindra: I put it to you that Jurudata stated it would not demand immediate repayment of the loan before July 31, 2025. Do you agree, disagree, don’t know or don’t understand?
Shahriman: I don’t know.
Rabindra: In (SHSB CFO Abbas Ariff’s) reply to you (via an email) sent on May 30, 2024, he stated that the letter of support was not a commitment of any new funds by SHSB to SRB but merely to satisfy SRB’s process audit requirements.
Shahriman: Yes.
Rabindra: So I put it to you that is in fact the position and your objection to the directors’ circular resolution (authorising the issuance of the letter of support) was totally without basis, do you agree?
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra then suggested to Shahriman that the letter of support was necessary to address “going concern” issues faced by SRB and Jurudata.
Rabindra: As the managing director of SRB, you are responsible for management, including the CFO. You would have known that he had written to SHSB requesting the letter of support to address “going concern” issues raised by SRB’s external auditor, EY. Do you agree, disagree, don’t remember, or don’t know?
Shahriman: Don’t know.
Rabindra: I put it to you that by objecting to the signing of the directors’ circular resolution to facilitate the letter of support, you were quite clearly and openly prepared to jeopardise the position of SRB, a public-listed company with binding obligations under the Bursa Malaysia Listing Requirements, by delaying the issuance of SRB’s audited financial statements for FYE 2024 by May 30, 2024
Shahriman: Disagree.
Shahriman is seeking to wind up SHSB, the parent entity of over 40 subsidiaries valued at RM832 million, including the publicly listed SRB.
Both Shahril and Shahriman hold a 48% stake in SHSB, with the remaining 4% owned by Rameli Musa.
The petition named SHSB, Shahril and Rameli as the respondents.
In the petition, Shahriman claimed that an irreparable breakdown in mutual trust and confidence between him and Shahril necessitated SHSB’s dissolution.
He further claimed the strained relationship between them was exacerbated by events surrounding Project Apex.
The respondents oppose the petition, contending that SHSB was never intended as a family business and that dissolution would be neither just nor equitable.
The proceedings before Justice Leong Wai Hong at the High Court will continue on Aug 18.
