TAWAU: The High Court here today was told that 41 gold dore bars remain unaccounted for, according to testimony by the plaintiffs’ first witness, Chong Tzu Khen, in ongoing civil proceedings.
The proceedings involve two consolidated suits, namely Bahvest Resources Berhad and Wullersdorf Resources Sdn Bhd (WRSB) as plaintiffs against Datuk Lo Fui Ming and others as defendants, as well as a separate action by Southsea Gold Sdn Bhd (SGSB) against WRSB and Bahvest.
Testifying before Judicial Commissioner Steve Ritikos, Chong said no gold dore bars reported as stolen have been recovered by the authorities to date.
He also clarified that no charges have been brought in relation to the missing gold bars, adding that a case previously referred to involved the removal of gold sludge, not gold dore bars.
During re-examination by plaintiffs’ counsel Norbert Yapp, the witness maintained that the 41 gold dore bars remain unaccounted for, while reiterating that no stolen bars had been recovered.
The court heard that discrepancies involving the 41 gold dore bars had been identified and are currently under internal review.
In his testimony, Chong said gold production and sales were subject to internal processes and regulatory reporting, including submissions to the relevant authorities for royalty assessment.
He added that his testimony was based on his knowledge as chief executive, including information obtained from internal staff and company records.
The witness concluded his testimony following re-examination, after which the court proceeded with the next witness.
Meanwhile, the court also heard testimony from the second plaintiff’s witness, Sim Kay Wah, a former independent non-executive director of Bahvest Resources Bhd, who said he was not involved in day-to-day operations or negotiations with Southsea Gold Sdn Bhd.
Sim gave evidence before Judicial Commissioner Steve Ritikos and was examined by defence counsel Andy Tay.
He told the court his role was limited to board oversight, adding that he relied on information and representations from management and professional advisers.
According to Sim, a letter of demand dated May 2023 was raised during an emergency board meeting and subsequently handled by management and legal advisers.
He said the board had mandated negotiations up to RM15 million, while any actions taken thereafter were viewed as “damage control” rather than prior approval.
Sim agreed that announcements to Bursa Malaysia generally require board approval or at least no objection, but acknowledged that some announcements may have been made before full consensus was reached.
On the letter of consent (LOC), he said the document existed within company records but was not emphasised, adding that it had been disclosed in earlier corporate documents.
Under cross-examination, Sim acknowledged that he did not have direct evidence for certain matters and that parts of his testimony were based on information from management as well as his own observations.
He also confirmed that he was not involved in the original negotiations or execution of agreements, with a number of transactions concluded before his tenure.
His testimony also touched on the RM6 million payment to Southsea Gold, particularly on the scope of management’s mandate and actions taken prior to formal board approval.
The court later adjourned proceedings to the scheduled hearing dates from May 13 to 15, 2026.
