BNP Paribas SA v Jacob Agam

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Steven Chong JA,Roger Giles IJ,Dominique Hascher IJ
• Judgment Date: 17 November 2017
• Neutral Citation: [2017] SGHC(I) 10
• Year: 2017
• Date: 17 November 2017
• Published date: 11 October 2018
• Hearing Date: 07 August 2017,10 August 2017
• Plaintiff Counsel: K Muralidharan Pillai, Luo Qinghui, Foo Ming-En Mark and Andrea Tan (Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP)
• Defendant Counsel: defendants absent.
• Citation: [2017] SGHC(I) 10
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Suit No 2 of 2016

Roger Giles IJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction

The Plaintiff, BNP Paribas SA (“BNP”), is an international banking institution headquartered in Paris. As later described, it sues as successor to the assets and liabilities of its former subsidiary, BNP Paribas Wealth Management (“BNPWM”). The Defendants, Jacob Agam and Ruth Agam, are Israeli nationals, and are siblings; for ease of reference and without intending any disrespect, we will refer to them as Jacob and Ruth, and together as the Agams.

BNP claims a sum in the order of €32 million from Jacob and Ruth, plus continuing interest and indemnity costs, under personal guarantees of loans made to their companies. For the reasons which follow, in our opinion it is entitled to succeed in its claim, and a counterclaim brought by Jacob should be dismissed.

Background to the dispute

Jacob and Ruth owned properties in France and Monaco (“the Agam properties”) through the following companies (collectively, “the Agam companies”). SCI Agam, a real estate company incorporated in France, owned a property in Paris (“the Paris property”). Jacob held 99.9% of the shares in SCI Agam, and Ruth held the remaining 0.1% of the shares. SCI Ruth Agam, also a real estate company incorporated in France, owned a property in Saint Tropez (“the Saint Tropez property”). The shareholdings were the reverse of the shareholdings in SCI Agam, Ruth holding 99.9% of the shares in SCI Ruth Agam and Jacob holding the remaining 0.1% of the shares. Det Internationale Ejendoms-OG Udviklingsselskab ApS (“Det Internationale”), a private company incorporated in Denmark, owned a property at Villa Saint Pierre in Marnes La Coquette, France (“the Saint Pierre property”). Ruth was the sole shareholder in Det Internationale. Bronton Assets Inc (“Bronton”), a private company incorporated in Panama, owned a property in Le Granada, Monaco (“the Granada property”). Jacob was the sole shareholder in Bronton.

Jacob was the sole director of SCI Agam and Det Internationale, and Ruth was the sole director of SCI Ruth Agam. Neither Jacob nor Ruth was a director of Bronton; it had three directors, Mr Paul Van Lienden, Mr Oscar Frye and Mr Edgardo Diaz. However, it is clear that the conduct of the affairs of the Agam companies was left to Jacob. He held a law degree from Tel Aviv University and an LLM in Securities and Corporate Finance from the University of Pennsylvania, and had a number of business interests including as founder and Chairman of a private equity fund, the Vertical Group.

Prior to 2010 the Agam properties were mortgaged to ING Bank (Monaco) SAM, subsequently merged with Bank Julius Baer (Monaco) SAM, as security for loans to the Agam companies then standing at approximately €17.8 million (“the Julius Baer loans”).

In early 2010 Jacob had initial contact with Mr Jean Chamoin and Mr Patrice Cucchi of BNPWM. BNPWM was a private bank incorporated in France providing bespoke credit and financing services. Messrs Chamoin and Cucchi described to Jacob the services which it could offer. In subsequent discussions Jacob expressed interest in leveraging on the Agam properties to create liquidity for investment purposes, and in refinancing the Agam properties with BNPWM and having it manage the investments, if a more attractive proposal than the Julius Baer loans was offered.

Jacob mentioned that he was particularly interested in investing in Asian markets, as he saw potential for growth, and in moving the business of the Vertical Group to Asia. Mr Chamoin introduced Jacob to Mr Charles Merimee of BNPWM’s Singapore branch, who on 10 February 2010 sent to him a presentation on the services offered by that branch and information on how to open a corporate account.

Thereafter Mr Cucchi and Mr Merimee had many discussions with Jacob in relation to a credit refinancing arrangement. At the time Mr Cucchi was Head of Credit Restructuring for Key Clients in France, and Mr Merimee was Director of International Clients in the Singapore branch. The negotiations towards credit refinancing occupied February, March and April 2010, with the involvement also of Mr Anthony Van Hagen on the Agam side as the Agam family’s legal adviser. Mr Van Hagen was admitted as an advocate in Paris and a barrister in London.

In late February 2010 Mr Cucchi provided a proposal for refinancing at up to 70% of the value of the Agam properties, the loans to be used in part to repay the Julius Baer loans and the balance for investment purposes. The loans were to be secured by mortgages, pledges of the shares in the Agam companies, personal guarantees of “the beneficial owners” (that is, Jacob and Ruth), and a pledge of 30% of the loan. In further discussions Jacob said that he wanted a loan facility at up to 100% of the value of the Agam properties, and in the latter part of March 2010 Mr Cucchi provided a revised proposal on that basis but with provision for margin calls if the value of the properties fell. In the meantime, account opening documentation for Singapore accounts for the Agam companies was compiled and signed, and an account for each was opened.

Valuations of the Agam properties came in at a total of €61.65 million. In April 2010 Jacob asked that the refinancing at up to 100% of the value of the properties proceed.

The refinancing documents

Documents were provided by BNPWM to Jacob and Mr Van Hagen for review on 27 May 2010. There was agreement to sign the documents on 7 June 2010, later pushed back to 9 June 2010. Arrangements were made for the French notaries necessary for the mortgage documents, Mr Pascal Dufour of SCP Dufour et Associés (“Dufour”) for BNPWM and Mr Pascal Bonne for the Agams and the Agam companies.

As we will later relate, there is dispute on the pleadings concerning the circumstances of Ruth’s signing of documents on 9 June 2010. Signature by her is not denied, and for the present we pass over the dispute; but with it in mind we think it appropriate to describe in a little detail the signatures and dates appearing on the documents in evidence.

The SCI Agam documents were as follows. A facility letter dated 27 May 2010 for a five year non-revolving term loan of €20 million, signed by Mr Van Hagen for the company by way of acceptance and also in the names of Jacob and Ruth by way of third party acceptance; however, Jacob’s signature and what appears to be Ruth’s initialling are adjacent to and in the vicinity of the last mentioned signatures. The stated dates of signing are 3 June 2010. None of the signatures is witnessed. A mortgage of the Paris property; we refer below to the situation as to signature and dates of all the mortgages. A personal guarantee signed by Jacob and Ruth. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee. A memorandum of charge on securities by SCI Agam, signed by Jacob for the company. The date of the document is 3 June 2010. The signature is witnessed by Mr Merimee. A memorandum of charge on securities by Jacob and Ruth, signed by them. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee.

The SCI Ruth Agam documents were as follows. A facility letter dated 27 May 2010 for a five year non-revolving term loan of €16.5 million, signed by Mr Van Hagen for the company by way of acceptance and by Jacob and Ruth by way of third party acceptance. The stated dates of signature are 3 June 2010. None of the signatures is witnessed. A mortgage of the Saint Tropez property. A personal guarantee signed by Jacob and Ruth. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee. A memorandum of charge on securities by SCI Ruth Agam, signed by Ruth for the company. The date of the document is 4 June 2010. The signature is witnessed by Mr Merimee. A memorandum of charge on securities by Jacob and Ruth, signed by them. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee.

The Det Internationale documents were as follows. A facility letter dated 27 May 2010 for a five year non-revolving term loan of €19 million, signed by Mr Van Hagen and Jacob for the company by way of acceptance and by Jacob and Ruth by way of third party acceptance. The stated dates of signature are 1 June 2010. The signatures are not witnessed. A mortgage of the Saint Pierre property. A personal guarantee signed by Jacob and Ruth. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee. A memorandum of charge on securities by Det Internationale, signed by Jacob for the company. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signature is not witnessed. A memorandum of charge on securities by Jacob and Ruth, signed by them. The date of the document is 1 June 2010. The signatures are witnessed by Mr Merimee.

We should say at this point that the Det Internationale facility agreement was later superseded by a facility agreement dated 27 June 2011, then by a facility agreement dated 16 March 2012, and supplemented by a notification letter dated 6 November 2012. The facility became a short term loan/overdraft of €4 million and a five year non-revolving term loan of €19 million, on the same securities as those given in 2010. The facility letters of 27 June 2011 and 16 March 2012 were signed by Jacob for the company by way of acceptance and by Jacob and Ruth by way of third party acceptance.

The Bronton documents were as follows. A facility letter dated 27 May 2010 for a five year non-revolving term loan of €6.2 million, signed by Mr Van Hagen and Jacob for the company by way of acceptance and by Mr Van Hagen in the names of Jacob and Ruth by way of third party acceptance; the signature of Jacob and what appears to be Ruth’s initialling are adjacent to and in the vicinity of the last mentioned signature. The stated dates of signature are hard to read, and could be 1, 4...