Gupta associates apply to court to remove business rescue practitioners

The Gupta brothers. Their associates are battling business rescue practitioners.

The Gupta brothers. Their associates are battling business rescue practitioners.

Published Dec 10, 2023

Share

THE battle over assets belonging to the Guptas has taken a new twist, after their long-time lawyer was allowed to represent some of the controversial fugitive family’s associates.

Ronica Ragavan, Dhanasegaran Archery, and Raymond van Rooyen are trying to remove the business rescue practitioners (BRPs) of Gupta-owned companies Tegeta Exploration and Resources, Koornfontein Mines, Optimum Coal Terminal and Optimum Coal Mine - Kurt Knoop, Johan Klopper, Juanito Damons and Christopher Monyela.

The matter is currently pending before the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria.

The Gupta associates wanted Gert van der Merwe and his law firm Van der Merwe Attorneys to represent them in court, but the BRPs questioned whether the lawyers were duly authorised to represent them.

Ragavan, who is the sole director of Koornfontein Mines, and Archery and Tegeta director van Rooyen argued that the Companies Act does not expressly stipulate which actions of the board of directors require the approval of a BRP.

They added that retained their powers as directors in terms of the strategic positioning of the company and in respect of the tactical implementation of the strategy.

They added that although the BRPs trump the powers of the directors, some powers of the directors nevertheless remained unaffected by business rescue such as in the instances where reference is made in the act to the company and matters of governance.

According to the BRPs, Archery and Duduzane Zuma’s appointments as directors of Optimum Coal Mine was in breach of the Companies Act because Ragavan has not responded to the BRPs’ and the Companies Intellectual Property Commission’s requests for information since last year.

Acting Judge Moses Phooko said the Companies Act does not expressly indicate which actions of the board of directors require the approval of a BRP.

”I further agree with the applicants’ (Ragavan, Archery and van Rooyen) submission that it would make no sense for the directors to seek approval from the BRPs to remove them from office. In other words, the BRPs would have to approve a process that seeks to remove them,” reads the judgment handed down on November 20.

Acting Judge Phooko declared that the authority of Van der Merwe and Van der Merwe Attorneys has been established and that they are authorised to represent Koornfontein Mines in the application to remove Knoop, Klopper, Damons and Monyela.

”It is declared that the authority of Van der Merwe and Van der Merwe attorneys has been established and Van der Merwe and Van der Merwe attorneys are authorised to represent the fifth applicant (Ragavan) in the removal application,” states the ruling.

Additionally it was declared that the authority of Van der Merwe and Van der Merwe attorneys has been established, and the lawyer and law firm are authorised to represent the Archery in the removal application.