• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Jewellery seized for rent

chobolan

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
1,054
Points
0

Oct 15, 2010

Jewellery seized for rent

By K. C. Vijayan

A JEWELLERY store which had more than 500 jewellery pieces seized by a mall owner for owing almost $900,000 in rent failed in the High Court to get the items back.

It had unsuccessfully argued that the goods belonged to its supplier and should not have been seized.
Cupid Jewels Pte Ltd had been renting a second-level unit at Orchard Central since August last year.

But a year later, Orchard Central sought court orders to have its goods seized by court officials after the jewellery store chalked up some $891,000 in rent arrears.


But a third party, Forever Jewels which supplied the items to Cupid, claimed that the goods belong to them and sought their return.


At issue is whether Orchard Central has the right to sell the items if they belonged to a third party who merely transferred the consignment of goods to a retailer.


Read the full story in Saturday's edition of The Straits Times.


 
Back
Top