ACCESS Finance board chairman Isau Bwerinofa has said the High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case in which former director Senziwani Sikhosana has taken him and seven others to court over a dispute involving three townhouse properties worth US$320 000.
Sikhosana and his firms — Ferden Investments, Rock Drill Mining and Seanmart Investments — had cited former Access CEO Singathini Raymond Chigogwana, Bwerinofa, Thirty-Six Mountabatten, Access Finance, Access Forex, Tara Capital, Sheriff of the High Court and the Registrar of Deeds and Companies as respondents.
In the application to the High Court, Sikhosana wants Chigogwana to transfer the properties which were part of their split settlement to him in real estate or cash.
He also wants him to pay all transfer taxes, imposts and costs associated with the deal.
Sikhosana had also submitted that in terms of clause 9 of the agreement of sale of his shares and property as well as the share purchase agreement, he should put Chigogwana in default to address the issue within 14 days.
If the breach is not rectified, he shall have a right to cancel the agreement or demand redress during the case.
In opposing the application, Bwerinofa, representing himself and Thirty-Six Mountbatten, Access Finance, Access Forex and Tara Capital, challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear the matter saying clause 21.1 of the Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) provides that any dispute shall be referred to arbitration.
Bwerinofa submitted that the SPA has yet to be implemented to the extent that the respective agreements are subject to the successful implementation of the SPA.
- US$200K armed robber in court
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Pomona cash row escalates
- Border Timbers targets European markets
Keep Reading
He further submitted that Sikhosana's resolve that the claim is US$320 000 without any arbitration is ludicrous.
“.... it must be noted that the First Applicant (Sikhosana), First Respondent (Chigogwana), Second Respondent (Bwerinofa), and other respondents are not counterparties to the sale agreements it is claimed are the subject of the sale agreements of the housing units. It is clear therefore that the dispute between the parties is the implementation of the SPA and all agreements that must be read together with the SPA,” Bwerinofa submitted.
Bwerinofa said Sikhosana had no authority to bring court proceedings against the firms cited as respondents, saying the resolution proceedings of the applicants, Ferden Investments, Rock Drill Mining and Seanmart Investments, relied upon to bring the present proceedings did not authorise the institution of court proceedings against the respondents.
Bwerinofa submitted that while they were incarcerated and Sikhosana was in South Africa, he withdrew more than US$60 000 but it was not disclosed. When asked why he had withdrawn the money, Sikhosana said he wanted to buy his freedom in Zimbabwe so he could come back, Bwerinofa alleged.
Chigogwana associated himself with Bwerinofa’s opposing affidavit.
