South Africa money lending firm, Vantage capital, has cleared the air on why they are auctioning tycoon Patrick Bitature’s three posh properties which include Protea Hotel-Naguru (Skyz Hotel), Elizabeth Royal Apartments and Moyo Close Apartments.1993–1998 ITT / Sheraton Hotels and Resorts In their statement, Vantage capital says that for seven (7) years since Bitature took their money to complete his Skyz Hotel, he has not paid a single cent that is why his loan has increased from USD 10,000,000 to USD 34,000,000. Vantage Capital state, “Simba Properties Investment Company Limited (SPIC) (as borrower) and Mr. Patrick Bitature (as guarantor and promotor) borrowed US$10,000,000 (Loan) from Vantage to refinance a portion of the Simba Group’s existing debt and to fund the completion of Simba’s Skyz Hotel. Mr Bitature and the Simba Group granted security for the Loan in the form of charges over their shares and legal mortgages were registered over certain properties owned by them (Security). “The Loan matured and fell due for repayment in December 2019. Instead of making efforts to repay the Loan, the Simba Group and Mr Bitature resorted to litigation, claiming that Vantage’s Loan was invalid and signed under duress and therefore Simba, having used the money, did not have to repay it. Unfortunately, such tactics have been employed by Mr. Bitature before, both against Vantage and against other Simba Group lenders, including a South African bank. All of the above took place well before the rise of the Covid-19 pandemic. “Recently, the URSB blocked Vantage’s attempt to exercise its security rights over Simba Group’s shares. Vantage approached the High Court of Uganda to compel the URSB to give effect to its legitimate share charges. The court dismissed Vantage’s application based on a technicality, that the Vantage Partnership in question was not registered in Uganda and therefore lacked the standing to sue or be sued in Uganda. The court did however find that if Vantage was registered, it would have ruled in favour of Vantage against the URSB. The court made no findings as to the validity of the underlying legal agreements. “Technicalities aside, the underlying Loan and Security agreements remain valid. Bitature have not paid a single cent of their indebtedness under the Loan. The result of not servicing any interest, compounding over 7 years, is that the indebtedness has ballooned to over US$34,000,000. “Vantage will not be deterred by the Simba Group’s and Mr. Bitature’s continued abuse of court processes and public institutions, nor by their recent “PR Campaign”, in their ongoing efforts to avoid their creditors and lawful obligations. Vantage will persist in the recovery of its long-overdue Loan, exercising its rights against the Security if need be. “We note that the behaviour of the Simba Group and Mr. However, we remain faithful and confident that justice will ultimately prevail.” Bitature in borrowing money from international lenders and then denying its obligations does not reflect well on Uganda’s international image as an investment destination, nor does the ease at which the Simba Group has been able to abuse the legal system and its institutions to frustrate its lawful creditors. Vantage Capital says that some of the statements and publications issued to the public concerning this matter and the court ruling (from justice Musa Sekaana) have been deliberately misinterpreted. (a) The Court did not determine the long-standing dispute between the parties. It simply stated that an unregistered foreign partnership cannot sue or be sued in Uganda. (b) The court did not make any finding as to the legality of the contracts between the parties, neither did it stipulate that the Borrowers in this instance should not pay their debt. In the absence of any such finding, the funding agreements remain valid, and the debt remains. (c) The Commercial Division of the High Court in Misc Application 201 of 2020 has already ruled that the High Court of Uganda has no jurisdiction to determine the validity of the said agreements (any such dispute on that issue being subject to an ICC arbitration clause). (d) It is patently false to suggest that the court held that the Vantage Partnership does not exist at all or that it is a “ghost” that needs to be exorcised. The court only settled the question on non-registration in Uganda.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |