dyton mupawaenda
Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Reporter
The long-standing financial dispute between Augur Investments and Fairclot Investments over part of the funding for the dual carriageway in Harare leading to RGM International Airport continues with Augur now approaching the Supreme Court challenging the High Court decision ordering attachment of land belonging to West Property Holdings to counterbalance the debt with Fairclot.
WestPro is a subsidiary of Augur Investments.
Augur entered into a contract agreement with Fairclot Investments trading as Truck and Construction Private Limited (T&C Construction) for the construction of the airport road and was offered part of stand 654 Pomona Township as collateral.
After constructing a portion of the road, a dispute over payment arose and Fairclot pulled out of the project and parties went for arbitration and Fairclot won the case.
However, following the promulgation of the Statutory Instrument 33 of 2019 which declared that debts owed in US dollars could be settled in local RTGS at a rate of 1:1, Augur Investments transferred $4.8 million and $1 078 040.21 to Fairclot Investments in local currency.
After the full payment the sheriff of the High Court lifted the attachment of the stand, which was then transferred to Doorex, a shelf company owned by Augur.
The appeal comes after Fairclot then successfully challenged the upliftment of the attachment on the property by the Sheriff of the High Court on the grounds that the debt had been cleared after the payment of $4.8 million in local currency.
Aggrieved by the lower court decision, Augur took the matter up to the Supreme Court on appeal.
In its notice of appeal, the property development company argues that the lower court erred in failing to hold that the arbitral award dated March 19 2015, granted in favour of Fairclot, constituted a liability affected by the statutory instrument which then was incorporated into the Finance Act No. 2 of 2019.
So Augur also argues that the lower court also erred in determining that the 2015 arbitral award only became effective upon its registration on 26 June 2019.
“At law an Arbitral Award constitutes a binding obligation as at the date of its grant and not its registration,” argues Augur in its grounds of appeal.
The RTGS payments were in fulfilment of the award of 2015.
The company is also arguing that the lower court erred in determining that the Sheriff had acted unlawfully in uplifting the judicial attachment on Stand 654 Pomona, since Augur had paid its debts.
Augur also argues that the High Court erred in cancelling ‘any and all’ transfers effected on the stand where the Sheriff had received title by operation of an extant deed of settlement and court order handed down by the High Court.
Online Reporter