Court cancels Polytex asset seizure

The Court of First Instance has cancelled an order to seize the assets of property developer Polytex, the company responsible for the controversial Pearl Horizon project. A statement from lawyer Leonel Alves, who represents the company, suggested that the order might be ineffectual.

The Court had ordered the seizure of four buildings and 200 parking spaces owned by Polytex in the “La Baie du Noble” development.

After years of stagnation, the Pearl Horizon land plot expired in 2015 without the project’s completion and, as a result, was reclaimed by the Macau government. An appeal of the government’s repossession was rejected by the Court of Second Instance earlier this year.

At the request of some 120 pre-sale buyers, the Court of First Instance had initially ordered some Polytex assets be seized for liquidation if the courts ruled that compensation was due.

Buyers were demanding refunds for money spent on the acquisition of residential units. They had expressed to the courts their fear that the company would use the assets to avoid any liability.

Although the Court of First Instance had initially agreed with the buyers, it now says it has changed its stance to align with Polytex.

Alves’s statement explained that the asset seizure was cancelled “because it is not possible to conclude that the company intends to dissipate its assets, as alleged by the promising buyers, in order to avoid any debts.”

“[The Court] has thus decided to cancel and withdraw all previous arrests,” the statement noted.

The Pearl Horizon case continues to spur controversy.

Polytex argues that it is the government’s fault the project could not be completed within the 25-year period, citing obstructive administrative procedures.

However, earlier this year the Court of First Instance made its first ruling on the case, deciding that the developer must reimburse an individual who purchased a pre-sale residential unit over MOP2 million.

Meanwhile, a government initiative to develop a replacement residential site this year was not well received by the buyers, who said that it was unfair.

A number of related lawsuits are still being handled by the courts. Last week, a journalist accused of slander by Polytex was cleared of charges, but was still required to pay MOP50,000 in compensation for damaging Polytex’s image. DB