AAEC Legal Team Requests Extension of Appeal Time After Court Ruling on LVS Litigation in Chinese Only

Asian American Entertainment Corp Ltd (AAEC) has requested that an additional 30 days be granted to prepare an appeal to the District Court’s (GTJ) decision regarding its lawsuit for damages against Las Vegas Sands, on the grounds that he had not received a full sentencing decision in Portuguese.

The lengthy lawsuit between AAEC and LVA came to a partial conclusion after the GRT issued a judgment unilaterally dismissing AAEC’s claims on April 28.

The AAEC was seeking compensation of at least 60 billion pesos ($7.5 billion) plus an additional amount from the US gaming company’s three subsidiaries for “maliciously” severing their partnership in the part of a bid for a gaming license in Macau two decades ago.

The three entities were LVS (Nevada) International Holding Inc; Las Vegas Sands LLC; and Venetian Casino Resort, LLC, AAEC initially seeking around MOP 96.5 billion in compensation for an alleged breach of contract after LVS left its joint bid for a Macau casino license in 2002 and partnered with Galaxy Entertainment Group instead later reducing this claim to MOP60 billion.

The company headed by Taiwanese businessman Marshal Hao was represented by lawyer Jorge Menezes in the Macau case, while LVS and its three subsidiaries were represented by Luís Cavaleiro de Ferreira.

According to a document seen by the Macau News Agency and submitted to the court on May 6, the legal team representing the AAEC twice requested in writing the court to provide the sentence in Portuguese, since the legal representatives of the two parties to the dispute are only versed in this language.

‘The court is versed in both languages, Portuguese and Chinese […] However, he only issued the decision in Chinese, a 99-page document. Plaintiff’s legal counsel has no way of reading the full version of the sentence for obvious reasons,” the claim states.

AAEC’s legal counsel then requested that an extension of 30 days be granted by the court for an appeal to be submitted – in addition to the 10 already provided – which is permitted on application if, for a “powerful reason “, a legal representative is not in a position to organize his defence. and urged whether a response from the court could be provided within 24 hours.

Alternatively, if a 30-day extension for the appeal is not provided, the legal counsel asked if a Portuguese translation of the sentence could be provided, as the official period for Apple does not begin until after this version is delivered, ‘out of respect for the Portuguese representatives deserve the court’.

A Portuguese summary of the sentencing was released last week, revealing that the court found that the AAEC acted in “bad faith” in its lawsuit against Las Vegas Sands, by “intentionally misrepresenting the facts and overestimating seriously the amount of compensation”.

About Charles D. Goolsby

Check Also

SC Judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul Highlights Importance of Philanthropy in Legal Education

NEW DELHI“The Singhvi Endowment represents the best of Dr. Abhishek M. Singhvi’s views and contribution …