WELCOME BACK: The actions of a past general committee led to Madam Kay's year-long suspension in 2006.

The apology, in the form of a circular sent to the homes of all 7,500 of its members, marked a turnaround for the club on several fronts: It was the first public statement on the case, and is a departure from its previous hard-nosed stand against Madam Kay.

In the circular, the club's president, John Kirkham, wrote: 'It is impossible for us to rewrite history, but we hope that we will learn from this experience.

'I want to apologise to Swee Pin for any inconvenience and embarrassment.'

The circular also urged its members to make 'Swee Pin welcome to the club so that she may enjoy its atmosphere and camaraderie'.

It added: 'We have all learned from this experience of what a club is all about and how we should behave. Friendship, compassion, and camaraderie are some of the core values that attract people to join and enjoy Club life. Let us make sure we take these values to heart.'

Madam Kay, 54, the deputy group executive chairman of travel agency SA Tours, made headlines in January last year when she took the club to court for suspending her membership.

Six months earlier, in May 2006, the club had charged and convicted her of falsely declaring Mr Ng Kong Yeam, 69, as her husband when she applied to be a member in 1992, so that he could play golf there for free.

She and Mr Ng were not legally married - that is, they did not register for a marriage certificate, but had been married under Chinese customary rites since 1982.

Without hearing her testimony, she was suspended for a year by the club's general committee, then led by Mr Giam Chin Toon.

She was also asked to pay $12,500 in back fees for her husband's use of facilities.

In March last year, the High Court ruled against her. But last month, the Court of Appeal ended the saga by overruling the club's decision to ban Madam Kay from its premises.

In its ruling, the Court, presided over by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and comprising Justice Andrew Phang and Justice V. K. Rajah, said the club had breached the rules of natural justice when it denied Madam Kay her right to defend herself during their deliberations.

The Court - Singapore's highest - also ordered the club to repay Madam Kay $1,764 in subscription fees it had collected from her during her year of suspension, as well as legal costs and damages.

Yesterday, Madam Kay was reluctant to comment on the club's apology and would only say: 'I am grateful to the president for taking the initiative to inform the club's members that I have been wronged.'

The conciliatory tone of the apology differed from the hardline stance taken by the club when the case first came up in 2006.

Then, Madam Kay had appealed to the club's committee members to reverse her suspension, but her pleas went unheard.

The club also refused her requests to take down the notices convicting her of fraud it had put up at its two locations in Sime Road and Island Club Road, even though the case was being contested in court.

Contacted yesterday by The Straits Times, one member who declined to be named, felt that the circular was fair, but wondered why the matter 'was allowed to go as far as it did'.

He said: 'Madam Kay did the right thing by taking the matter to court. I think the committee expected her to go quietly.

'They were wrong.'

zengyan@sph.com.sg