Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

Funny that a certain person is named. I wonder if there were some side deals going on that Joyce and Lee didn't know about. And what happened to the $14 million Sunland paid Prudentia (side deal?)???

The Sydney Morning Herald:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/emails-c ... -pz92.html

CRACKS have emerged in the fraud prosecution of two Australian executives in Dubai, raising questions about the claims of their alleged victim, Sunland, the Gold Coast-based developer that alleges it was duped in a property deal.

The Herald understands a series of emails will be relied upon by the defendants in Dubai and in a civil case in Australia in an attempt to contradict Sunland's claims that it was kept in the dark and that Matt Joyce and Marcus Lee misled it when they were working for Dubai Waterfront, the world's biggest waterfront development.

Mr Joyce and Mr Lee spent nine months behind bars in the emirate until they were bailed in October to fight the fraud case in which Sunland is the key witness for the prosecution. Its claims of being cheated are also central to the civil case it has against Mr Joyce and other parties in the Federal Court, where it is trying to recoup millions of dollars lost on the venture.


Matthew Joyce . . . accused of fraud.
In the Dubai and Federal Court proceedings, Sunland alleges it was misled in two critical ways when it bought Plot D17 in 2007 from the Dubai government-owned master developer Nakheel, parent company of Dubai Waterfront.

First, it says its chief operating officer in Dubai, David Brown, was duped into believing another Australian company, Prudentia, had rights to buy the plot, so Sunland paid Prudentia a $14 million ''consulting fee'' to release the land.

Second, Sunland claims Mr Joyce, as managing director of Dubai Waterfront, failed to disclose a long-term friendship with Prudentia's director Angus Reed, with whom he attended Geelong Grammar.

However, Mr Brown sent an email to Mr Joyce on August 19, 2007. This is expected to be key evidence in Mr Joyce's defence in the Federal Court. Evidence for the plaintiff and defence is yet to be heard in the proceedings, where the emails are expected to be presented in their full context.

In the email, Mr Brown appears to acknowledge the status of Plot D17, and that Sunland's founder and executive director, Soheil Abedian, was informed. At the time, Sunland and Prudentia were negotiating a joint venture on the development plot.

''Thanks Matt,'' Mr Brown wrote, ''I got your message and yes Soheil is aware that Prudentia are still in negotiations with Nakheel and have not purchased the site. Jeff [Austin, Nakheel's director of planning and development] and Anthony [Brearley, a Nakheel lawyer] have also made this clear. The fact they have not purchased D17 yet is better because [it will] allow us and Prudentia to agree to JV [joint venture] terms before we proceed to buy the site.''

In that email Mr Brown also wrote: ''I have informed Soheil of your prior relationship with Prudentia and your desire not to get involved.''

While it did not mention the old school connection, this email may suggest that Mr Joyce wanted to remain at arm's length from the deal. Mr Brown wrote that Sunland would continue to deal ''with Anthony, Marcus [Lee] and Jeff''.

But 10 days later, on August 29, in a 5.56am email to Mr Joyce, Mr Brown was ''extremely'' disappointed to hear that Nakheel was negotiating to sell the plot to a Russian group ''considering the time and effort that we and our JV partner has put into the purchase of this plot''. Again, this calls into question Sunland's claim that it did not know Prudentia had secured no rights over the plot.

In Sunland's statement of claim in the Federal Court, Mr Brown alleges that Mr Joyce told him by phone on the same day as this email that other potential buyers, including Russians, might offer a much bigger price for the plot. Sunland alleges this was to pressure it to proceed with the purchase.

The time of this alleged call is unclear, but in Mr Joyce's reply email to Mr Brown, at 6.58am, he wrote that he doubted ''our guys would negotiate with another party without at least informing you'' - unless it was the work of Nakheel Sales without Dubai Waterfront's knowledge.

Prudentia and Angus Reed, in their defences lodged in the Federal Court, say they never suggested they owned Plot D17 or had sealed an option to buy it. And they insist Sunland was fully aware of this.

Rather, they argue, Nakheel had merely regarded Prudentia as a ''preferred negotiator''. On August 10, 2007, Nakheel's Jeff Austin had confirmed in a letter to Mr Reed that it would be happy ''to grant you preliminary development and planning approval''.

''We also confirm that we would be happy to entertain discussions with your joint venture partner provided [they] are a proven developer like Prudentia,'' Mr Austin wrote.

Mr Joyce's defence in the Federal Court says a draft sale agreement had been sent to Prudentia on August 15 and Dubai Waterfront did not want to appear to be involved in ''gazumping'' by dealing directly with the ''secondary developer'', Sunland.

In any event, the joint venture negotiations collapsed and Sunland decided to buy Plot D17 alone. A document tendered in court in Dubai, dated September 18, 2007, shows its board agreed on the purchase and to enter a memorandum of understanding with Prudentia. The next day, David Brown and Angus Reed signed the deal, which included a strict confidentiality clause between the two parties. Sunland agreed to pay the consulting fee. In return, Prudentia handed over its ''right to negotiate'' with the master developer.

It has also been alleged that Marcus Lee, who was Dubai Waterfront's head of commercial operations, had intervened to lower the price of Plot D17 to push the purchase along. Under this deal, it is alleged, Prudentia would take a ''land uplift'' fee - the difference between the lower price and the market price.

However, an internal Nakheel email on August 27, 2007, appears to clear Mr Lee on this count. Nakheel's then director of sales and marketing, Manal Shaheen, sent the email to her chief executive and to Mr Joyce and Mr Lee. Ms Shaheen told them her team had found the price of 125 UAE dirhams per square foot was too high. She wrote that Mr Lee's ''business report should say market price which is 110 and then give me to sign''.
Mr Lee is expected to rely on this exchange to support his consistent position: that he merely did his job according to instructions of his superiors at Nakheel. When he later recommended a price of 120 UAE dirhams per square foot, he will argue, it was approved by his superiors.

Ms Shaheen's email suggests Nakheel was informed. Nakheel has not come to the defence of Mr Lee, who says he never gained or stood to gain from the land sale. Nor has Nakheel defended Mr Joyce, who says he was paid nothing in connection with the Sunland deal.

Sunland is yet to develop Plot D17. Prudentia and Mr Reed, in their defence in Australia, claim this means it has lost the opportunity to reduce its alleged loss by about 24 million dirhams ($7.16 million).

WTF, why would someone care to remember email sent three years ago? And what were the accused doing all these years, sleeping?

ekka wrote:WTF, why would someone care to remember email sent three years ago? And what were the accused doing all these years, sleeping?

Before you commented maybe, just maybe, you should have famliarized yourself with the history of the case. When did you arrive to Dubai, yesterday??

Just what is your malfunction Ekka ?

This information has been with the defendants lawyers all along, not something that they pulled out of a hat "last night".

Long story short - Sunland realised too late the Lemon that they were buying into and sought to use laws from the Dark Ages as employed in the UAE to saddle the JV partner with some alleged wrong doing and get themselves out at par.

NOT I hasten to add, that much different to when Nakheel sued MGM alleging that they (MGM) were nearly insolvent and unable to complete on the deal - When surprise surprise - that is exactly the situation that Nakheel was in.

no its not WTF, its WAFJ as in what a joke !

I can only hope - but you wont find me betting 2 Schekels on it - that Matt and Marcus get off, would be a first !

p.s. Nice catch BB

viking-warrior wrote:Just what is your malfunction Ekka ?

This information has been with the defendants lawyers all along, not something that they pulled out of a hat "last night".

Long story short - Sunland realised too late the Lemon that they were buying into and sought to use laws from the Dark Ages as employed in the UAE to saddle the JV partner with some alleged wrong doing and get themselves out at par.

NOT I hasten to add, that much different to when Nakheel sued MGM alleging that they (MGM) were nearly insolvent and unable to complete on the deal - When surprise surprise - that is exactly the situation that Nakheel was in.

no its not WTF, its WAFJ as in what a joke !

I can only hope - but you wont find me betting 2 Schekels on it - that Matt and Marcus get off, would be a first !

Clearly M&M aren't using local counsel to defend themselves!!! Nakheel lost their bid against MGM, and may just very well lose this case. Like I said, possibly a side deal was cut and they were excluded (2 less "partners"). The Dubai Court had nothing on these guys other than he said, they said, we said. Seems M&M may very well have more to show for their defense than the prosecutor has to show to make a case, which they really haven't done up to now. Maybe the prosecutors team needs to follow the papertrail, which may very well show that Prudentia had a "silent partner(s)".

DF has got a new legal secretary named BB.

Nice catch indeed.

viking-warrior wrote:no its not WTF, its WAFJ as in what a joke !

I can only hope - but you wont find me betting 2 Schekels on it - that Matt and Marcus get off, would be a first !

I think you would clearly lose the 2 Schekels mate

Fundamentalism doesn't accept separation between church and state (secularity) en therefore doesn't allow an independant judicial body or judge that is able to objectively rule regarding the state-owned company practises. Welcome to absolutist or totalitarian state legislatures.

And some people find it strange that Herve filed suit in the US. Best thing he did in his life was to escape the place.

RobbyG wrote:

viking-warrior wrote:no its not WTF, its WAFJ as in what a joke !

I can only hope - but you wont find me betting 2 Schekels on it - that Matt and Marcus get off, would be a first !

I think you would clearly lose the 2 Schekels mate

Fundamentalism doesn't accept separation between church and state (secularity) en therefore doesn't allow an independant judicial body or judge that is able to objectively rule regarding the state-owned company practises. Welcome to absolutist or totalitarian state legislatures.

And some people find it strange that Herve filed suit in the US. Best thing he did in his life was to escape the place.

You just don't quit do you bonehead?

Those rejection letters, and lack thereof, have done a job on you hon. Get over it will ya??? We all got the message; you're becoming very repetitive. I can't get over the level and intensity of your bashing considering you never lived in Dubai.

Hope you have better luck somewhere else. You need to move on to, oh I don't know, Brazil?? (as good a place as any). If it doesn't work out they will have to put up with you bashing them!!!

Oh get real you. I didn't make up that system. Its simply a fact you can't ignore.

You just don't quit do you bonehead?

Those rejection letters, and lack thereof, have done a job on you hon. Get over it will ya??? We all got the message; you're becoming very repetitive. I can't get over the level and intensity of your bashing considering you never lived in Dubai.

Hope you have better luck somewhere else. You need to move on to, oh I don't know, Brazil?? (as good a place as any). If it doesn't work out they will have to put up with you bashing them!!!

Well said BB

RobbyG wrote:Oh get real you. I didn't make up that system. Its simply a fact you can't ignore.

We are well aware of the system and how it functions (or doesn't). You aren't telling us anything we don't know. But it doesn't affect you, so I don't know why you think you need to keep pounding the drums. You don't need to state your "views on Dubai" on a constant basis. There are countries in worse condition when it comes to "law and order". Go find one and make that your next mission.

Like I said, we got the message as to where you stand. Give it a rest.

Let me try to get you to turn your focus towards something closer to home.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/churc ... r-emotions

I would post more related links, but I'll let you do the homework.

I want to be clear on one thing here.

First of all, I say what I think is reasonable. And when I say that you are the new legal secretary of DF, thats a compliment hon.

Second, I responded to VW about two Australian businessmen who are locked up in a judicial system that is so far off the secular system they are used to, that the chances are remote they will get a fair trial. After all, one can still remember the fresh ruling on Sheikh Issa's case, not to mention the extortion that Herve experienced from the Dubai police and Dubai World.

You can ask him how fair the system is.

So, did I say anything 'bashing'? No, because its the simple truth about how the state is strangled with sharia law. But your denial about these facts says enough. Especially when you tell lies to people on DF when you say I vote for Wilders, while I clearly said I vote otherwise. Now who's credibility is on the line here...

RobbyG wrote:I want to be clear on one thing here.

First of all, I say what I think is reasonable. And when I say that you are the new legal secretary of DF, thats a compliment hon.

Second, I responded to VW about two Australian businessmen who are locked up in a judicial system that is so far off the secular system they are used to, that the chances are remote they will get a fair trial. After all, one can still remember the fresh ruling on Sheikh Issa's case, not to mention the extortion that Herve experienced from the Dubai police and Dubai World.

You can ask him how fair the system is.

So, did I say anything 'bashing'? No, because its the simple truth about how the state is strangled with sharia law. But your denial about these facts says enough. Especially when you tell lies to people on DF when you say I vote for Wilders, while I clearly said I vote otherwise. Now who's credibility is on the line here...

Did I say you said something about "bashing"? Why would you, since you are the one doing the bashing.

Maybe you don't realize how frequent it is. It's not as if it's the first time you made your point about the judicial system and how screwed up it is. As I said, we are fully aware of the "system" but your need to bring up as if to make a point that we don't get it.

Hon, we have all been there and bought the tee-shirt - but it's time you changed yours!

OK, RobbyG will not be voting for Wilder (at least not yet )

Nope, the truth shall never be hidden.

It must be out here in the wide open, so people can get interested and learn about the system. There's an evolution process here. For women its called emancipation.

You women never got those equal rights in Europe and the US if it wasn't for the separation between church and state. You have your position to thank for that. Just to remind you, in Europe, we wasted rivers of blood to get to the 'enlightenment'.

One day Islam will experience the same progression, the sooner people demand change, the sooner we can all live in peace. All a matter of Secularity. Read the history books and you'll agree.

RobbyG wrote:Nope, the truth shall never be hidden.

It must be out here in the wide open, so people can get interested and learn about the system. There's an evolution process here. For women its called emancipation.

You women never got those equal rights in Europe and the US if it wasn't for the separation between church and state. You have your position to thank for that. Just to remind you, in Europe, we wasted rivers of blood to get to the 'enlightenment'.

One day Islam will experience the same progression. All a matter of Secularity. Read the history books and you'll agree.

Does this mean that I can take my chains off now?? Do you think you are revealing something people don't already know about???

If you really want to do something, focus on China.

http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

UNDP report details plight of China's 'missing' women Source: Global Times [01:50 March 10 2010] Comments By Yin Hang

Millions of women in China go "missing" every year due to discrimination, poor healthcare and a cultural preference for boy babies, a report released Tuesday by a UN program said.

The report said 42.6 million women died from discriminatory treatment due to lack of access to health and nutrition or through pure neglect. Many of them were "never born" due to widespread preference for boys.
The report, Power, Voice and Rights: A Turning Point for Gender Equality in Asia and the Pacific, did not reveal any major new information but said that more boys than girls are born in Asia as a whole than in any other region of the world. They quoted data from 2007.

East Asia has the highest maletofemale sex ratios at birth 119 boys for every 100 girls, exceeding the world average of 107 boys for every 100 girls in the period between 2000 and 2005, the report said.
"China and India each has about 42.6 million missing women. The numbers seem to be increasing in absolute terms," the report said.

"The challenge faced by China on the issue is a significant one," said Abhimanyu Singh, director and the representative of UNESCO's China Theme Group on Gender.

With China's strong preference for boys, the sex ratio of children under 5 in 2005 was 122.66 (122 boys for every 100 girls born), the highest in Asia Pacific, the report added.

"The high ratio indicates a strong preference for male children and the deliberate use of certain means to achieve it a form of gender inequality that begins even before birth," the report concluded.

In an article published last Thursday in the Economist, there was a story about a newborn baby girl in the mountainous region of Yimeng in Shandong Province. Witnesses said the baby was snatched from her mother and dumped headfirst in a chamber pot because the family demanded a son and had no intention to violate the nation's onechild policy.

"The number of 'missing girls' is higher in richer, bettereducated provinces: prenatal ultrasound scans and selective abortions have proved even deadlier to girls than the cruel dictates of village elders," the article said.

The issue triggered heated discussions at the ongoing NPC and CPPCC sessions. CPPCC delegates from Chongqing and Anhui Province hoped the sessions could readdress the issue of adjusting the onechild policy considering it caused unbalanced male and female ratio.

But opponents insisted that the onechild policy has proven effective in China, which should not be blamed for the unbalance.

There's no plan currently to change the policy.

The UNDP report also mentioned that nearly 70 percent of women work in China, well above the global average of 53 percent. This statistic runs parallel to the higher longterm growth and industrialization experienced by the nation.

Bora Bora wrote:
Does this mean that I can take my chains off now?? Do you think you are revealing something people don't already know about???

If you really want to do something, focus on China.

http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

You'll be amazed how many people are ignorant about history. Most people just live month by month on a paycheck.

I do focus on China too, but from an investment perspective. Since this is a Dubai Forum, I will limit myself to the matters that belong here.

I try to repeat the message in a humorous way OK?

RobbyG wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:
Does this mean that I can take my chains off now?? Do you think you are revealing something people don't already know about???

If you really want to do something, focus on China.

http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

You'll be amazed how many people are ignorant about history. Most people just live month by month on a paycheck.
I do focus on China too, but from an investment perspective. Since this is a Dubai Forum, I will limit myself to the matters that belong here.

I try to repeat the message in a humorous way OK?

So it's safe to say that you are positioning yourself in the first group to become one of the few who is NOT ignorant about history, and you certainly are not in the second group (that would require someone having a job).

China: Nothing like looking the other way as long as it's to your benefit/gain. So your interest in China is merely financial and you really couldn't give a crap about what is going on with regard to millions of women missing? Let me guess - that's China's problem, right?

And NOW you want to "limit" yourself to the matters that belong on DF?

If China is merely a financial interest to you, what is Dubai???

Always did hon, unless peepz like you start talking about Dutch matters, which I address at times when you are way off reality again.

Just focus on the fraud and the justice system in Dubai shall we, after all that is what this topic is all about! At least relate to Middle Eastern matters for that sake. Sighh

[quote="Bora Bora]
http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

[/quote]

Revealing fetus s.ex is illegal in most cities in China.

You are free to believe in everything you read though.

WhiteJade wrote:[quote="Bora Bora]
http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

[/quote]

Revealing fetus s.ex is illegal in most cities in China.

You are free to believe in everything you read though.[/quote]

WJ, you coming from China could certainly clarify if there are statements in the article that are true or not. But you do say it is illegal in MOST cities. Is that to say that it is done? Are any of the statements in the article untrue?? I think this is by far a much more important issue that the "politics" of Dubai.

Bora, start a thread about China. I will give answers to all your questions there.

You have my word.

Bora Bora wrote:

WhiteJade wrote:[quote="Bora Bora]
http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2010-03/511342.html

[/quote]

Revealing fetus s.ex is illegal in most cities in China.

You are free to believe in everything you read though.[/quote][/quote]

WJ, you coming from China could certainly clarify if there are statements in the article that are true or not. But you do say it is illegal in MOST cities. Is that to say that it is done? Are any of the statements in the article untrue?? I think this is by far a much more important issue that the "politics" of Dubai.[/quote]

Politics, religion, justice system... its all intertwined in Islam, which can easily mean its a topic for the Religion Forum also. You pick and chose.

How easy to dismiss matters that do really care to people. Hypocrisy

RobbyG wrote:Politics, religion, justice system... its all intertwined in Islam,

WHAT?!?!?!?

How easy to dismiss matters that do really care to people. Hypocrisy

You have an issue with Islam, you know that don't you?? But you shouldn't expect everyone else to share it. Take it up in the religious forum with Shafique who is always up for a good debate.

I don't have an issue with Islam as a religion being practised, albeit preferably in the private sphere of individuals or families.

But I do have objections against the ideology of Islam, the fundamentals, which have different interpretations among the scholars and some do incite Jihad against disbelievers. That is troublesome.

The cultural values (e.g. the position of the woman) need to be addressed over time with the diplomatic weapon of free speech. Nothing else.