1. This is an application for a civil forfeiture order brought in terms of SS 79 and 80 of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act [Chapter 9:24](“ the Money Laundering Act” or simply “ the Act”). The targeted property includes motor vehicles, shares and immovables. More
This is an application for civil forfeiture made in terms of ss 79 and 80 of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act [Chapter 9:24] (“the Money Laundering Act”)
2. The applicant urges me to forfeit to the State the fifteen motor vehicles and two immovable properties on the basis that they are proceeds of serious crimes. The contention taken being that the first respondent raised money from unlawful activities and, to conceal the illicit origin of that money, used those funds to purchase the property sought to be forfeited. More
1.This is an application for an order for civil forfeiture of property made in terms of ss 79 and 80 of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act [Chapter 9:24] (“ the Money Laundering Act”).
2.The property in question consists of two immovables and three motor vehicles. More
The plaintiff in this matter instituted summons for provisional sentence against the defendant for the sum of USD $537 556.00, together with interest at the rate of 5% per cent per annum from March 31 2022. The background of this case will help put the law into perspective. The plaintiff and defendant entered into an oral agreement whilst in the United Kingdom. The agreement was for construction of a farmhouse, church building and hospital. A total amount of US$995 380.65 was advanced to effect the construction. In addition, the parties signed and Memorandum of Agreement hereinafter referred to as the... More
This urgent chamber application stems from a seemingly unending dispute. I remark so because from the papers before me, the acrimony between the parties has been on-going for a few years now. More
On the 30th of August 2022, the applicant filed what he termed, “Court application for rescission of judgment in terms of common law on the grounds of fraud and error”. The application was strenuously opposed by the 1st and 2nd respondents. On the 18th of October 2022, the 1st respondent not only filed his notice of opposition and opposing affidavit. He also filed a counter application seeking an order for a decree of perpetual silence against the applicant. Both applications were set down for the 17th of March 2023. For ease of reference, I will maintain the same citation of... More
The applicant owed the second respondent the sum of US$327 345.77 plus interest thereon at the rate of fifty percent per annum. On a date that is not material, the second respondent obtained judgment in the High Court against the applicant for the payment of the debt together with the accrued interest.
The applicant failed to satisfy the judgment debt. In due course, the first respondent attached the applicant’s farm and sold it by public auction. The sale realised the sum of US$205 000.00. The applicant successfully objected to the sale. The first respondent set the sale aside, accepting that... More
