KUALA LUMPUR, June 10 — The High Court here today ordered Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor to pay RM67.5 million to Lebanon-based jeweller Global Royalty Trading SAL over the loss of 43 pieces of jewellery, within one month from today.
Judge Datuk Quay Chew Soon made the order after allowing a suit filed by Global Royalty against Rosmah.
The judge also ordered the wife of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to pay costs of RM75,000 each to Global Royalty and the third parties, namely the Inspector-General of Police and the Malaysian Government.
On March 29, 2023, Global Royalty filed a lawsuit against Rosmah, alleging she falsely claimed that 44 pieces of jewellery including diamond necklaces, bracelets, and tiaras, sent to her by the company’s agent, had been seized by the Malaysian authorities under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001.
However, the company claimed that only one of the 44 pieces of jewellery was retained by the police and the remaining 43 pieces were not in their custody.
Global Royalty further asserted that Rosmah had shifted the responsibility to the Malaysian Government when, in fact, the jewellery had gone missing.
Justice Quay when delivering today’s decision via Zoom, ordered Rosmah to pay RM67,461,027.37 within one month, together with interest at five per cent per annum from the date of judgment until full settlement.
The judge also dismissed Rosmah’s claim for an indemnity against the third parties.
Justice Quay said the court found that the defendant (Rosmah) had failed to discharge her obligations as a bailee, noting that the non-return of the jewellery constitutes prima facie evidence of negligence.
He said the plaintiff (Global Royalty) does not bear the burden of proving the precise manner in which the jewellery disappeared while it was under the defendant’s custody.
The judge further noted that the defendant could not merely cite the police raid, the possibility of seizure or that her bodyguards had handled the bags to discharge the legal burden imposed on her as a bailee.
“The defendant must affirmatively prove what precisely happened to the jewellery, that its loss did not arise from her negligence and that the 43 pieces of jewellery were in fact seized by the PDRM, and the jewellery remained intact and accounted for throughout the alleged chain of custody. However, the defendant failed to do so.
“The defendant’s attempt to shift focus onto speculative explanations concerning the raid and seizure by the PDRM is untenable. The fact remains that the defendant failed to return the remaining 43 pieces of jewellery and cannot satisfactorily account for their fate,” said Quay.
He added that the defendant had consistently maintained in her testimony that the jewellery had been delivered to her for viewing and publicity purposes.
Justice Quay further observed that while it was claimed the jewellery had been seized by the police during the 2018 raid, the evidence adduced established only one fact with certainty.
“One item of jewellery was eventually identified during the forfeiture proceeding and returned to the plaintiff. There is no evidence proving that the remaining 43 pieces of jewellery were ever seized by PDRM at all,” he said.
The judge noted that a critical aspect of the defendant’s defence collapsed due to her failure to call material witnesses who were purportedly involved in the handling, locking, packing, safeguarding and movement of the jewellery.
He said the defendant attempted to rely on unnamed “security personnel”, “bodyguards”, “staff”, “butlers”, and other unidentified individuals to explain how the jewellery was packed, how the bags were locked and transported and who handled the keys during the transfer of the items from Sri Perdana, Putrajaya to Pavilion 45 here and how the jewellery was safeguarded there before the PDRM raid.
“However, none of these material witnesses was called to testify at the trial,” he added.
Lawyer Datuk David Gurupatham appeared for the company, while Rosmah was represented by counsel Rajivan Nambiar, and Senior Federal Counsel Liew Horng Bin acted for the IGP and the government.
Meanwhile, Rajivan, when contacted, said his client would file an appeal and apply for a stay of today’s decision.
