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 the parties on the matter.
He held that the order given on January 27, this year, by the court 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 the joint liquidators of Mechmar Corporation.
In the order, Judge Bongole had said, “Allowing further submissions will not be within the spirit of disposing fairly of this suit or saving costs.”
The judge said that having taken into consideration the request by the defendants and objection in affidavit in answering the interrogatories, he had found that allowing further submissions at that stage would cause protraction of the suit, which was not within the spirit of the law.
Judge Bongole pointed out that he had granted leave sought by the defendant companies and directed VIP Engineering Company to deliver to them interrogatories in writing.
The judge noted that bundles of documents had been delivered along with an affidavit in an answer containing objections as per the law.
“At this stage, with the huge bundle 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 had said.
During hearing of the plea by the banks, counsel Michael Ngalo for VIP Engineering and Marketing Limited, had submitted that the application by the bank group for interrogatories was prolix, scandalous and oppressive and that it had been filed in total abuse of the court process.
Mr Ngalo submitted that the application in question was prematurely lodged as what the bank group was seeking had nothing new apart from being a fishing expedition for evidence that would be produced in court during the trial and thus was intended to derail the process of the court in hearing and determining timely the main case.
In his submission to support his clients’ application, advocate Gasper Nyika, for the bank group, had contended, among others, that the company (VIP) had not answered the interrogatories provided as ordered by the court and the answers given were not sufficient as required.
He cited one interrogatory which required the company to provide an answer as to who, other than Standard Chartered Bank, was currently the project financier or lender of IPTL, but VIP Engineering and Marketing Limited responded differently as opposed to what the question wanted.
However, in his response, Mr Ngalo maintained that his client had provided sufficient answers to the interrogatories, notably on the issue whether Standard Chartered Bank was a financier of IPTL, of which 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 other answer than that do you need? You cannot choose what answer my client should provide to suit your requirement,” he submitted. 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 interest in IPTL.
Apart from monetary compensation, VIP also seeks for a declaration 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 legally been creditors of IPTL and the defendants committed fraud, money laundering, corporate waste and oppression, diversion of funds and conversion of IPTL and VIP property, as a result of their conduct.
Daily News
No comments:
Post a Comment