Latest news with #PhilipJeyaretnam
Business Times
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Times
Singapore's KPB Biosciences fails in bid to unfreeze assets in US$830 million Novo Nordisk legal battle
[SINGAPORE] Locally headquartered biotech firm KPB Biosciences has failed to set aside a court order for its assets to be frozen, with the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) having dismissed its application on Tuesday (Aug 12). The worldwide freezing order had been obtained by Danish drugmaker Novo Nordisk, which is claiming up to S$830 million in damages from KPB, over allegations that the Singapore-based biotech firm had misled it about a drug for hypertension and kidney disease. Novo Nordisk had acquired the drug from KBP in late 2023 in a deal worth up to US$1.3 billion. But less than a year later, the pharmaceutical giant halted clinical trials because the treatment was proven to be ineffective. Novo Nordisk, best known for Ozempic, the blockbuster diabetes drug, subsequently announced an impairment loss of around US$800 million. In February, Judge Philip Jeyaretnam granted the worldwide freezing order in support of the suit, which is being arbitrated in New York. The judge determined there was a real risk that KBP would place its assets beyond Novo's legal reach. Transfers of US$339.1 million from KBP to its holding company, as well as US$578.5 million paid out in dividends, indicate that its founder, Huang Zhenhua, had the intention of moving assets out of Novo's reach in anticipation of a claim, he said. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The freeze encompasses KBP's Singapore-based assets, which include the company's DBS fixed deposit account containing US$218 million as of Dec 31, 2023, and Huang's Sennett Estate property, valued at US$7 million at purchase. The case at hand KPB had sought to set aside the freeze order on four main grounds: It argued that Novo lacked a strong legal case, and that there was no real risk of asset misuse; it further argued that Novo had failed to provide full and frank disclosure of the freeze order. The company's lawyers also contended that the application did not satisfy the legal requirements under Section 12A of the International Arbitration Act 1994, which allows the Court to grant interim measures supporting international arbitration proceedings. But in his judgement, Judge Jeyaratnam found that Novo had a good arguable case, as the evidence sufficiently established that both KBP and Huang had misled it on the efficacy of its kidney-disease drug. He also ruled that the risk that KBP and Huang would move the assets out of Novo's reach was real. The monies Huang received have remained in his personal bank accounts. But when viewed in the context of Novo's lawsuit against KBP, these funds were found to have passed through multiple intermediaries before reaching him. The evidence thus suggested that Huang had expected Novo to file claims against KBP, but not against him personally. As for whether Novo's application fulfilled Section 12A, the judge said the requirements were established as the emergency arbitrator could not grant the freezing order, which was sought without notifying the other party to prevent asset transfers. For these and other reasons, the Court declined to set aside the freeze order. Who is KBP's founder Huang Zhenhua? The native of Shandong, China, now a Singaporean citizen, has been described in the media as a 'serial entrepreneur', with more than 20 years' experience in drug research and development. After earning his PhD from Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, he founded Xuanzhu Biopharm in 2002. A decade later, he sold it to Sihuan Pharmaceutical Holdings. He served as executive director and shareholder at Sihuan before it delisted from the SGX in 2009 and then relisted in Hong Kong the following year. Huang established KBP in 2011 in Shandong. Court documents show he owns a 40 per cent stake in the company, now incorporated in Singapore, with its global headquarters in International Plaza on Anson Road, and its operations in China and the US.
New Paper
09-07-2025
- Politics
- New Paper
Buddhist organisation 'faction' members lose court challenge against expulsion
Twenty members of Buddhist organisation Soka Gakkai Singapore (SGS) who were expelled for taking part in an informal study group have lost their High Court challenge against their expulsions. The leadership of SGS was largely of the view that the existence and activities of the "faction" group were contrary to the interest and harmony of the association. The 20 individuals alleged that they were not given a fair opportunity to be heard and that the leaders who expelled them showed bias and prejudgment. In a written judgment on July 8, Justice Philip Jeyaretnam rejected their arguments and upheld the expulsions. The judge concluded that the claimants were given a full and fair opportunity to be heard, but made a deliberate choice not to defend themselves. "The claimants chose not to avail themselves of this opportunity and cannot complain that they were denied the right to be heard," he said. The judge added: "Upholding the decisions to expel the claimants does not mean that the claimants are not free to pursue their faith, only that they must do so outside membership of SGS." SGS, an organisation practising Nichiren Buddhism in Singapore, is part of an international network of affiliated organisations. It was first registered as a society in 1972 and then as a charity in 1985. Under its Constitution, members can be expelled if they are determined by the management committee to have, among other things, acted against the interests or harmony of the association. In the current case, the 20 individuals were in a group named Solidarity of Genuine Sensei's Disciples (SGSD). One of the leadership figures of the group is an expelled former member of SGS. The group held monthly study sessions over Zoom. It also pooled funds to buy study materials and develop a mobile application. Their lawyer, Mr Choo Zheng Xi, likened SGSD to a Bible study group formed by members of the congregation of a Christian church. In August 2022, a former member of the group, whose former wife is one of the 20 claimants, revealed its existence to a leader of SGS. In December that year, the management committee took the view that the formation of the group, if true, would be "unorthodox and unacceptable, being contrary to the interests and harmony of SGS", and required further investigation. In February 2023, senior leaders of SGS held training sessions for all levels of leaders, where they stated that SGSD "spread resentment and dissatisfaction towards SGS and its central figures". The senior leaders said there was a need to "confront the influence of evil... (and) crush the malicious actions" of the group. All the claimants were also invited to dialogue sessions, in an attempt to stop them from being part of the group, said SGS, which is represented by Mr Goh Kok Yeow. The seven who attended the sessions were told by leaders that the "faction" group disrupted the unity of SGS. Between April 2023 and January 2024, SGS notified the individuals to attend disciplinary hearings. The alleged misconduct included congregating as a group with a self-given name, organising activities not aligned with SGS' objectives, and soliciting funds without SGS' knowledge and approval. SGS provided bundles containing text messages and other documentary evidence after the individuals asked for substantiation. None of the claimants attended the hearings, which began in November 2023. After the hearings concluded, the individuals were asked to resign, in letters issued between December 2023 and February 2024. When they refused, the association issued them notices of expulsion in March 2024. Expulsion meant the loss of the right to participate in regular SGS activities and to certain benefits such as conferment of a sacred object and issue of an introduction letter to visit Soka Gakkai International in Japan, both of which are discretionary. The 20 individuals then took SGS to court, seeking a declaration that the expulsions were null and void because they were in breach of the rules of natural justice or were irrational or unreasonable. In his judgment, Justice Jeyaretnam emphasised that the court does not intervene on whether the individuals deserved to be expelled, or on any question of religious doctrine. The judge said the question before him was whether the decisions were procedurally fair and whether the decisions were irrational or unreasonable. Justice Jeyaretnam said the claimants were given ample notice of the allegations that they had to answer to but made a deliberate choice not to attend the hearings or rebut the allegations. SGS provided evidence of SGSD being an organised group led by an expelled former member. Evidence was also provided that the group had its own mobile app and raised funds for an unauthorised project. The judge also disagreed that the leadership had prejudged the disciplinary cases against the claimants. He noted that it was only after the training and dialogue sessions failed to bring the group members back into the fold that the leadership moved on to disciplinary proceedings.
Straits Times
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
‘Faction' members lose court challenge against expulsion from Buddhist organisation
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox The judge said the claimants were given a full and fair opportunity to be heard, but made a deliberate choice not to defend themselves. SINGAPORE – Twenty members of Buddhist organisation Soka Gakkai Singapore (SGS) who were expelled for taking part in an informal study group have lost their High Court challenge against their expulsions. The leadership of SGS were largely of the view that the existence and activities of the 'faction' group were contrary to the interest and harmony of the association. The 20 individuals alleged that they were not given a fair opportunity to be heard, and that the leaders who expelled them showed bias and prejudgement. In a written judgment on July 8, Justice Philip Jeyaretnam rejected their arguments and upheld the expulsions. The judge concluded that the claimants were given a full and fair opportunity to be heard, but made a deliberate choice not to defend themselves. 'The claimants chose not to avail themselves of this opportunity and cannot complain that they were denied the right to be heard,' he said. The judge added: 'Upholding the decisions to expel the claimants does not mean that the claimants are not free to pursue their faith, only that they must do so outside membership of SGS.' Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore NDP celebrations to be held at 5 heartland sites, including Bishan and Punggol, on Aug 10 Singapore Keep citizens at the centre of public service, Chan Chun Sing tells civil servants Singapore SIA flight from Brisbane to Singapore diverted to Perth due to technical issue Singapore New Draft Master Plan could reignite developers' interest to buy land Asia Seoul scorches at 37.8 deg C, highest early-July temperature ever recorded Business Great Eastern could resume trading after delisting vote fails to pass; OCBC's exit offer lapses Asia China warns Trump on tariffs, threatens retaliation on supply chain deals Multimedia 'I suspect he's cheating': She finds proof when spouses stray SGS, an organisation practising Nichiren Buddhism in Singapore, is part of an international network of affiliated organisations. It was first registered as a society in 1972 and then as a charity in 1985. Under its constitution, members can be expelled if they are determined by the management committee to have, among other things, acted against the interests or harmony of the association. In the current case, the 20 individuals were in a group named Solidarity of Genuine Sensei's Disciples (SGSD). One of the leadership figures of the group is an expelled former member of SGS. The group held monthly study sessions over Zoom. It also pooled funds to buy study materials and develop a mobile application. Their lawyer, Mr Choo Zheng Xi, likened SGSD to a Bible study group formed by members of the congregation of a Christian church. In August 2022, a former member of the group, whose ex-wife is one of the 20 claimants, revealed its existence to a leader of SGS. In December that year, the management committee took the view that the formation of the group, if true, would be 'unorthodox and unacceptable, being contrary to the interests and harmony of SGS', and required further investigation. In February 2023, senior leaders of SGS held training sessions for all levels of leaders, where they stated that SGSD 'spread resentment and dissatisfaction towards SGS and its central figures'. The senior leaders said there was a need to 'confront the influence of evil... (and) crush the malicious actions' of the group. All the claimants were also invited to dialogue sessions, in an attempt to stop them from being part of the group, said SGS, which is represented by Mr Goh Kok Yeow. The seven who attended the sessions were told by leaders that the 'faction' group disrupted the unity of SGS. Between April 2023 and January 2024, SGS notified the individuals to attend disciplinary hearings. The alleged misconduct included congregating as a group with a self-given name, organising activities not aligned with SGS's objectives, and soliciting funds without SGS's knowledge and approval. SGS provided bundles containing text messages and other documentary evidence after the individuals asked for substantiation. None of the claimants attended the hearings, which began in November 2023. After the hearings concluded, the individuals were asked to resign, in letters issued between December 2023 and February 2024. When they refused, the association issued them notices of expulsion in March 2024. Expulsion meant the loss of the right to participate in regular SGS activities, and to certain benefits such as conferment of a sacred object and issue of an introduction letter to visit Soka Gakkai International in Japan, both of which are discretionary. The 20 individuals then took SGS to court, seeking a declaration that the expulsions were null and void because they were in breach of the rules of natural justice or were irrational or unreasonable. In his judgment, Justice Jeyaretnam emphasised that the court does not intervene on whether the individuals deserved to be expelled, or on any question of religious doctrine. The judge said the question before him is whether the decisions were procedurally fair and whether the decisions were irrational or unreasonable. Justice Jeyaretnam said the claimants were given ample notice of the allegations that they have to answer, but made a deliberate choice not to attend the hearings or rebut the allegations. SGS had provided evidence of SGSD being an organised group led by an expelled former member. Evidence was also provided that the group had its own mobile app and raised funds for an unauthorised project. The judge also disagreed that the leadership had prejudged the disciplinary cases against the claimants. He noted that it was only after the training and dialogue sessions failed to bring the group members back into the fold did the leadership move on to disciplinary proceedings.
