CASINO

Malaysian high roller loses $4.2M case vs. Resorts World Sentosa

TAGs: Genting, Resorts World Sentosa, Singapore

Lady Luck continued to elude a Malaysian businessman after his bid to void his SGD5.9 million (US$4.2 million) casino debt was rejected by Singapore’s high tribunal.

Malaysian high roller loses $4.2M case vs. Resorts World SentosaThe New Paper reported that Singapore’s Supreme Court threw out the petition of businessman Lee Fook Kheun against Resorts World Sentosa (RWS), saying that the petitioner failed to prove his claim that he was intoxicated when he signed credit deals. And even if Lee was too intoxicated when he signed, Singapore Justice Valerie Thean noted that the petitioner failed to immediately cancel the agreements.

“Mr. Lee has not proved on the balance of probabilities that he was so intoxicated that he failed to understand the nature and effect of the Credit Agreements,” Thean said in her ruling, according to the news outlet.

Records showed that Lee first visited RWS in July 2010 hoping to open his own seafood restaurant in Genting Singapore’s integrated resort. Instead, Lee found himself becoming one of RWS’ high rollers.

Lee initially got SGD5 million ($3.6 million) worth of gaming chips when he visited RWS on August 20, 2010. After two days, RWS issued another SGD5 million ($3.6 million) in chips to the businessman.

Lee reportedly incurred SGD10 million ($7.29 million) in debt after he blew his chances in the gaming area. In 2015, he entered a settlement agreement acknowledging his RWS debt. Lee’s debt was trimmed to SGD5.9 million ($4.2 million) after he paid a total of SGD4.07 million ($2.97 million) between August 20, 2010 and August 21, 2015.

The businessman, who was said to be a director and shareholder of various construction companies, signed the agreement on January 2015 in order to save him from further embarrassment stemming from RWS’ planned lawsuit.

During the trial, Lee’s lawyers Michael Palmer and Reuben Tan argued that their client wasn’t in the right state of mind when he signed the RWS documents. Lee’s counsel also wanted to declare the agreement null and void since their client did not seek the credit recommended by the casino staff.

RWS’ lawyers questioned Lee’s credibility after the businessman was found to have given inconsistent statements before the tribunal.

Comments

views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CalvinAyre.com