Chris Mbunwe
25 February 2008
The High Court of Mezam in Bamenda has forestalled plans by some shareholders to sell Amity Bank Plc to Atlantic Bank.
In a ruling dated February 18, Justice Ignatius Taminang issued an order restraining Victor Ndzana Nguga, the COBAC Provisional Administrator of Amity Bank Cameroon, COBAC.
The order also restrains the National Monetary Authority and the Ministry of Finance from proceeding with the sale of over 51 percent of Amity Bank to any persons pending hearing and determination of the following suits, HCB/38/06-07, HCB/34/06-07, HCB/444m/06-07 and a private complaint filed on December 27, 2007.
Earlier, at the hearing of the matter, counsel Ben Suh Fuh and Godlove Ngo referring to the Uniform Act relating to General Commercial Law in Chapter 3 and buttressing their arguments with articles 116, 117 and 118, prescribing the form and modalities of a commercial sale said the respondents had not shown any authentic act authorising them to sell Amity Bank.
The counsel for the plaintiffs who included Francis Yong, Lawrence Loweh Shey Tasha, Dr. Daniel Lantum, Pauline Toh Jua and 14 others urged the court to take judiciary notice of the pendency of the three substantive suits before this court.
Justice Taminang posited that it is borne out in the affidavit in support of the motion that all the applicants are shareholders of Amity Bank Plc. They have instituted a series of actions in the High Court of Mezam Division for the determination and protection of their rights in the bank, because of what they refer to as the illegal way in which the bank is being managed.
The court revealed that while the actions are pending, and without consulting them - Tasha, Yong, the respondents, Victor Ndzana COBAC etc, have been nursing moves to sell their shares to Atlantic Bank.
To avert such a transaction, Tasha's group known here as applicants, published a press release on the situation of Amity Bank Cameroon Plc in Eden Newspaper of Wednesday, Monday, October 31 - November 5, 2007, warning the public that in spite of the pendency of actions before the court, the first respondent, Ndzana, initiated moves and transactions with the objectives of modifying illegally the structures, composition and the amount of capital by the bank and even proposing the sale of more than 50 percent of the bank to a new investor.
Tasha's group's apprehensions are heightened by a publication in another newspaper, "La Nouvelle Presse" No 330 of January, Monday 28, 2008. The said publication is captioned "L'histoire de l' état les actionnaires aux abois."
According to Justice Taminang, he sees no injustice likely to be caused to the respondents (Ndzana and co) if they tarry with the alleged sale of Amity Bank pending the determination of the rights of unsatisfied shareholders.
If, however, they feel aggrieved, it has been held that where leave is granted ex parte it is within the inherent jurisdiction of the court to revoke that leave if it feels that it gave its original leave under a misapprehension upon new matters being drawn to its attention, states the ruling.
From the foregoing, Taminang ruled that the respondents Ndzana, COBAC etc, are hereby restrained from carrying out any sale of Amity Bank until the rights of the applicants must have been determined in the various pending hearing and determination before this court.
Secondly, that any purported sale of Amity Bank by respondents in defiance of the above order shall be null and void and finally, that if the respondents feel aggrieved by the above orders, they are at liberty to seize this court with an action to show cause why the orders should be discharged.
Talking to The Post after the court ruling, Lawrence Tasha, founder of Amity Bank, on behalf of 20 others said that it is seven years today that he has been trying in vain to be received by the Ministry of Finance.
On why he was flushed out of Amity Bank, Tasha said when he negotiated for FCFA 75 million from some American investors to be injected into the bank, his enemies saw their positions threatened.
"Most of these shareholders who are not comfortable seeing me at Amity are Bamilekes. After throwing me out, they broke into my office and have blocked me from entering that office where my personal effects are still lying," said Tasha.
Tasha does not seem to understand why the government is insensitive to what is happening to Amity Bank. Silence on the part of government could be rightly interpreted as complicity.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Post. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
