Zimpapers Logo

2004 from Alshams Buildings Materials, owned by businessman Mr Jayesh Shah.
Mr Mordecai Mahlangu of Atherstone and Cook represents the three directors – Mr William Nyemba, Mr Christopher Goromonzi and Mr Josphat Sachikonye.

Justice Samuel Kudya had ruled that the debt be paid with interest at the rate of 15 percent per annum from December 2004.
The three directors were granted the loan when they operated a Jersey Island registered firm, Barato Holdings Limited.

Last week, the Trust directors confirmed the appeal. They said their lawyer would be filing a notice of appeal with the High Court soon.
“An appeal will be made and the matter thus remains in the realms of the courts,” said Mahlangu.

He said his clients provided enough security for the loan that was in excess of the loan. He said there should therefore be no shortfalls.
Trust chief executive officer Mr Nyemba said the transaction between the trio and Alshams Building Materials had nothing to do with Trust Bank. As such, the judgment should have no effect on the current operations of the bank, he said.

Mr Nyemba was responding to market reports that Trust Bank would make the payment on behalf of the three directors of the holding company.
At the time the loan was granted, the directors were convinced that Barato had the capacity to pay it back in terms of the agreement. But, in fact, they failed to repay the loan.
The three were scheduled to pay back the money by December 30, 2004. The same agreement required Mr Nyemba, Mr Goromonzi and Mr Sachikonye to sign personal guarantees.

In default, it was provided that Alshams would appropriate the security given and sue the defaulters for any shortfall.
After failing to repay the loan Barato tendered 42 299 673 shares in Ariston Holdings as additional security. Mr Mahlangu said this was in excess of the loan.

In August 2005, Alshams cancelled the agreement and appropriated the Ariston Holdings shares deposited with it. The shares, at that time were valued at US$683 753,44 prompting Alshams to sue over the shortfall.
Earlier in their opposing papers the three argued that they had resigned from Barato and that the appropriated funds exceeded the loan.

They also said the loan was paid back in the form of dividends.