When it
comes to structuring – or re-structuring - a company, it is always prudent to
anticipate potential legal liabilities and complications down the road. It is,
however, considerably out of the ordinary to frame an entire company exclusively
around the need to avoid future litigation or arbitration.
Of
course, if you are already mired in litigation or if you engage in business
practices that are likely to lead to it, then it’s the obvious route. And that
is something the Al Rajhi family, one the foremost business dynasties in the
GCC, clearly understands.
In
fact, the strategy the family has used in Qatar to move real estate assets out
of the view and reach of investors with claims upon them, is a mirror image of
tactics used in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
In
Dubai, it was used to expropriate a 25 per cent stake in real estate company,
Tameer Holdings from Mr. Omar Ayesh. In Abu Dhabi, it was used to prevent
hundred of creditors from winning the return of their deposits on incomplete real
estate projects. (See previous articles)
LOOKING FOR LEGAL LOOPHOLES IN QATAR
In
early 2014, the Al Rajhis initiated an overhaul of the corporate structure of the
Land International Investment and Real Estate Development Company, based in
Qatar. The company, an affiliate of the sprawling Al Rajhi Group, had ambitious
plans – and financing from a bank consortium – for 14 towers in “The Pearl-Qatar.”
Significantly,
however, at the time the changes were made to the structure of The Land, seven
of the 14 towers were embroiled in litigation or arbitration. A confidential
legal plan obtained by the Foundation for Business Standards provides a rare
glimpse into the way such transactions are undertaken. And how they are deliberately
designed to take advantage of the gaps in
the existing laws and regulations covering limited liability companies.
HEDGE FUND LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE AL RAJHIS
It is
not only small, individual investors who are hurt by such machinations: In
Qatar, one of the large claimants was Bridgehouse Capital, an Anglo-American
hedge fund based in London. Bridgehouse had invested US$300 million in the
Pearl development, yet remained frustrated in its protracted stefforts to claim
restitution.
In a March
2014 email exchange with lawyer Danny Rifaat, a founding partner with Al Misnad
& Rifaat in Qatar, Donald Jordan of Bridgehouse wrote: “Your clients have
deliberately hidden certain facts…such as they accepted deposits of $145
million and signed contracts related to certain plots on the Pearl…those
contracts were terminated in July 2013.”
He
concludes about the Al Rajhi’s conduct: “The most generous assessment is breach
of contract.”
Negotiation
of a resolution was further complicated by the fact that a Bridgehouse
employee, Philip Barton, had accepted a penthouse from the Al Rajhis as an
incentive for making the initial investment in the development.
When Mr.
Barton Declined the offer of a
US$20-million settlement and pursue arnbitration for the full $US300 million
Bridgehouse had invested, he was threatened by a senior executive in the Al
Rajhi organization..
In an
email sent on March 6, 2014, Aasma Kahn, chief legal officer for Al Rajhi
Holdings wrote: “Please note that Phil accepted a penthouse for free. He is a
cheat and/or bribe taker…I wonder how Bridge investors would feel if they knew
Phil personally benefitted…”
Both Abdullah and Ahmed Al Rajhi
were recipients of Ms. Kahn’s email, along with Mansour Karboush, CEO of Al
Rajhi Holdings.
A DEFENSIVE LEGAL STRATEGY
The escalation of the legal
wrangling between Bridgehouse and the Al Rajhis is just one of the reasons why
the family’s legal advisors devised a plan to insulate the towers and their
development schedules from one another.
According to that plan “The main
aim of the restructure is to create segregation through legal structuring to
prevent the individual liabilities of each development (caused by multiple
customer litigations) from impacting the entire business operations.”
So what did the plan entail?
Essentially, it created three
separate holding companies, each personally controlled by one of the five Al
Rajhi brothers. Ownership of the towers developed by The Land was to be
allocated between them with an eye to “stagger the launch of projects by six
months to one year.”
According to the documents, “The
alternating launch structure will minimize delay in a single project impacting
the next project or tying it up in litigation.”