Macau Appeals Court Dismisses AAE’s Lawsuit Against Las Vegas Sands
Posted on: October 18, 2024, 02:10h
Last updated on: October 18, 2024, 02:10h
A recent ruling by a Macau appeals court has put a significant dent in the long-standing legal battle between Asian American Entertainment (AAE) and Las Vegas Sands (LVS). After nearly 25 years since the inception of their partnership, the court dismissed AAE’s bid to revive its multibillion-dollar lawsuit over an agreement that ended on a sour note.
AAE and LVS partnered on a license application for what later became the Sands Macao. But the relationship broke down and AAE wants a multibillion-dollar piece of the pie. (Image: Sands Macao)
The Origins of the Dispute
AAE, helmed by Taiwanese businessman Marshall Hao Shi-sheng, asserts that it is owed between US$7.5 billion to US$12 billion by the prominent US casino operator, claiming to be at the center of the largest breach of contract case in corporate history. The conflict dates back to 2001, following a joint bid by both companies for a casino license amid Macau’s newly liberalized gaming market.
Subsequently, LVS opted for a partnership with Galaxy Entertainment for what ultimately became the iconic Sands Macao. This dive into the international gaming scene significantly enhanced LVS’s status, elevating it to become one of the wealthiest casino operators worldwide. Yet, AAE maintains a belief that its initial input was crucial, arguing that LVS would have struggled without its guidance through the intricate licensing hurdles and cultural landscape of Macau.
Financial Claims and Legal Arguments
The US$7.5 billion to US$12 billion compensation claim put forth by AAE is purportedly based on a calculation reflecting 70% of LVS’s profits in Macau, spanning from when it commenced operations in 2004 until the license’s expiration last year. AAE’s court documents indicate a viewpoint that the profits accrued by LVS during that period were significantly influenced by their partnership.
However, LVS has strongly contested these claims, arguing that it was AAE that severed ties and moved first for a partnership with Galaxy. Testimonies from former Macau regulators further supported LVS’s claims, indicating that LVS’s reputation and experience as a premier Las Vegas operator made it an attractive partner, arguably downplaying AAE’s early contributions.
Court Rulings and the Future of the Case
In a bold statement, the lower court ruled back in May 2022 that AAE had “distorted the facts” and “seriously overestimated the amount of compensation,” alleging that the company entered litigation in “bad faith.” Following the dismissal by the appeals court, AAE’s legal team faces a crucial juncture; while the judgment details are yet to be disclosed, they still have the option to escalate the case to Macau’s highest judicial entity, the Court of Final Appeal.
AAE’s Legal Tenacity
Despite legal setbacks, AAE’s attorney, Jorge Menezes, expressed resilience, asserting that his clients are prepared to “take the fight to the very end.” This statement underscores AAE’s commitment to pursuing their claims, hinting at potential further legal battles that could continue to unfold.
Conclusion
The case between AAE and LVS embodies a complex narrative of corporate partnership, ambition, and legal intricacies that could reshape aspects of Macau’s gaming landscape. As LVS continues to thrive as a casino giant, AAE’s pursuit of billions reflects not only the stakes of this individual litigation but also broader implications for businesses navigating the often tumultuous waters of partnership agreements and corporate governance. The path ahead for AAE remains uncertain, but their determined stance indicates that this story is far from over.
1
20
20
