Tuesday 23 Apr 2024
By
main news image

PUTRAJAYA (Dec 7): Former Aker Engineering Malaysia Sdn Bhd legal manager Seetha Kumarasamy last week filed a motion with the Court of Appeal to examine four Petronas officers who prepared two separate licensing assurance review (LAR) reports for 2017 and 2018, where the latter report was different from the earlier one.

Seetha's application came after Aker Engineering and two other companies — Aker Solutions APAC Sdn Bhd and Aker Solutions Malaysia Sdn Bhd — were allowed by the Court of Appeal last month to adduce the LAR reports to show the local equity composition of the companies in a suit that the former employee filed against them but was struck out by the High Court and hence the appeal.

She filed the application in the Court of Appeal on Dec 2, where she hoped her counsels would be allowed leave (permission) from the court to examine the four Petronas officers.

“The issues are in relation to Petronas' extent of knowledge pertaining to Aker Engineering's shareholding and management. This is relevant to my appeal,” Seetha said in her affidavit in support sighted by theedgemarkets.com.

She is appealing against the High Court's decision earlier this year to strike out her suit against her former employer.

This follows her employer and the two companies having earlier sued her and obtained a court order to seize her laptop and gain access to her email accounts in 2018 after she was ordered by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to assist in its probe. She was fired in February 2018 after being suspended by the company earlier.

In response, Seetha filed a suit and named parent company Aker Solutions ASA (Norway) along with the three companies, claiming their actions against her in filing the suit amounted to an abuse of process and conspiracy.

She sought unspecified damages for legal costs, anxiety and mental distress her former employer had caused her in filing the 2018 suit, as well as loss of reputation and credibility. The three companies' application to strike out the suit was allowed by the High Court in May this year, so what remains is Aker Solutions ASA (Norway).

In the LAR report for 2017, the Petronas officers listed Aker Engineering as 90% foreign, therefore making it ineligible for all of its 16 registered standardised work and equipment categories with Petronas.

Aker Engineering

Seetha claimed in her affidavit in support of the application to examine the Petronas officers that Aker Engineering had intentionally not declared its actual company shareholdings to the Companies Commission of Malaysia and the Board of Engineers Malaysia.

The findings resulted in Aker Engineering to be downgraded from bumiputera local to foreign as its local ownership was below 30%, making it ineligible or fail to meet the necessary minimum technical requirement.

However, the LAR report in 2018 by some of the same officers found Aker Engineering in its study of legitimate fronting company that the appointment of two locals as shareholders through side shareholder agreements had resulted in the company to be reclassified and maintained as bumiputera local and Petronas approved for no action to be taken against it.

Seetha said the oral evidence of the four will immensely assist the court to decide on her present appeal.

Hence, she hoped that the Court of Appeal will allow her application to examine the four Petronas officers.

Her appeal was fixed for next year after the appellate court allowed Aker Engineering and the two companies' application to produce the two LAR reports for 2017 and 2018, but Seetha's lawyers informed the court in the session that they will be applying an application to cross-examine, hence this application.

Late last month also saw Aker Engineering manager Ahmad Hatta Kamaruzaman being given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for his charge of allegedly cheating Petronas Carigali regarding the composition.

The Sessions Court judge allowed a preliminary objection as it ruled that the charge preferred by the MACC was defective.

Edited BySurin Murugiah
      Print
      Text Size
      Share