High Court of Tanzania
order the VIP Engineering and Marketing Limited to provide any more information on people interrogated in the 787bn/- case involving the Independent Power Tanzania Limited (IPTL).
Judge Salvatory Bongole ruled against Standard Chartered Bank PLC,
Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited, Standard Chartered Bank
(Tanzania) Limited and Joint liquidators of Mechmar Corporation
(Malaysia) Berhad after considering arguments presented by parties to
the matter.
He held that the order by the court given on January 27 this year,
in respect of other defendants in the matter, Wartsila Nederland BV and
Wartsila Tanzania Limited, who had pressed for the same answers, also
applied to the banks and joint liquidators of Mechmar Corporation.
On that order, Judge Bongole said: “Allowing further submission
will not be within the spirit of disposing fairly of this suit or save
costs.”
The judge said having taken into consideration the request by the
defendants and objection in affidavit in answering those interrogated,
he found that allowing further submissions at this stage shall cause
protraction of the suit, which was not in the spirit of the law.
Judge Bongole pointed out that he had granted leave sought by the
defending companies and directed VIP Engineering Company to deliver to
them those interrogated in writing. The judge noted that many bundles of
documents had been delivered along with an affidavit in answer
containing objections according to the law.
“At this stage, with the huge bundles supplied, may I state that
the respondent (VIP Engineering) has sufficiently supplied the documents
sought and for the documents requested, but not supplied, shall if the
applicant may deem right, be requested in cross-examination during
trial,” the judge said.
During the plea hearing by Banks, Counsel Michael Ngalo, for VIP
Engineering and Marketing Limited, had submitted that the application by
Bank groups for those interrogated was prolix, scandalous, oppressive
and not exhibited bonafide.
In addition, it has been filed in total abuse of court process, he argued.
Ngalo submitted that the application in question was prematurely
lodged as what the Bank groups were seeking were nothing other than “a
fishing expedition of evidence that would be produced in court during
the trial.” He said they were intended to derail the process of the
court in hearing and determining the main case in time.
In his submission to support his clients’ application, Advocate
Gasper Nyika, for the Bank groups, had contended that, among other
things, the company had not answered those interrogated as ordered by
the court and the answers given were not as sufficient as required.
He cited one of those interrogated who required the company to
provide an answer on who, other than Standard Chartered Bank, was
currently the project financier or lender of IPTL. But the response from
VIP Engineering and Marketing Limited was different from what the
question wanted, he said.
However, in his response, Ngalo maintained that his client
provided sufficient answers to those interrogated, notably on the issue
whether Standard Chartered Bank was the financier of IPTL. The VIP
Engineering Company responded that there was none currently and the Bank
was not a lender.
“My client provided the answer in clear terms that he does not
know who the project financier is at the moment and that Standard
Chartered Bank is not the lender of IPTL. What answer other than that do
you need? You cannot choose what answer my client should provide to
suit your requirements,” he declared.
In the main case, VIP Engineering Company is suing the defendants
for their alleged role in defrauding its interests in IPTL affairs. The
company has sued all the defendants, demanding 490.9m US dollars, for
alleged fraud, conversion of rights and corporate waste in dealing with
its interests in IPTL.
Apart from the monetary compensation, VIP Engineering Company also
seeks for the court to declare that the company and IPTL have suffered
substantial loss and damages as a result of the defendants’ actions and
conduct.
The plaintiff is also requesting the court to declare that neither
the Banks nor their agents have ever been legal creditors of IPTL.
Further, the plaintiff asked it to declare that the defendants committed
fraud, money laundering, corporate waste and oppression, diversion of
funds and conversion of IPTL and VIP Engineering Company property, as a
result of their conduct.
0 comments:
Post a Comment