30.07.2015 Views

Download - Axiata Group Berhad - Investor Relations

Download - Axiata Group Berhad - Investor Relations

Download - Axiata Group Berhad - Investor Relations

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

35. CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTS (CONTINUED)(c)List of contingent liabilities as at 31 December 2009 of the <strong>Group</strong> are as follows: (continued)Ppotential exposure/claims2009 2008Description RM million RM million6 Dato’ Saizo Abdul Ghani vs Celcom 30.0 30.0In July 2006, Celcom was served with a Writ of Summons and Statement ofClaim by the Plaintiff, Dato’ Saizo Abdul Ghani (trading under the name and styleof Airtime Telecommunication). The claim against Celcom and Kamsani bin HajiAhmad (“Kamsani”), a former employee of Celcom for general damages, exemplaryand aggravated damages in connection with a breach of contract and allegedlibel.The Directors, based on legal advice, are of the view that Celcom has reasonablygood chance of success in defending the claims by the Plaintiff.7 Asmawi bin Muktar vs Celcom 19.0 19.0In July 2006, Celcom was served with a Writ of Summons and Statement ofClaim by the Plaintiff, Asmawi bin Muktar (trading under the name and style ofGM Telecommunication & Trading). The claim against Celcom and Kamsani is forgeneral, exemplary and aggravated damages in connection with a breach ofcontract and alleged libel.The Directors, based on legal advice received, are of the view that Celcom hasa reasonably good chance of success in defending the claims by the Plaintiff.8 Mohd Shuaib Ishak (“MSI”) vs Celcom and 13 others 2.1 2.1In November 2007, MSI filed a legal suit against Celcom disputing the legality ofthe acquisition by Celcom of the shares in TM Cellular Sdn. Bhd. (now known asCelcom Mobile Sdn. Bhd.) (“Celcom Mobile”) in 2002 and the acquisition by TESBand TM of the shares in Celcom in 2003.The Directors are of the view that the claims made by MSI are not sustainableand accordingly will take steps to strike out the action.9 MSI vs Celcom 5,259.5 5,259.5In February 2008, MSI commenced proceedings against, inter alia, the former andexisting directors of Celcom and TM for failing to obtain the consent of DeTeAsiaHolding GmbH pursuant to the Amended and Restated Supplemental Agreementdated 4 April 2002 prior to entering into the SPA with TM for the acquisition byCelcom of the shares in Celcom Mobile.The Directors are of the view that the claims made by MSI are not sustainableand accordingly will take steps to strike out the action.Annual Report 2009 • 255

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!