Nairobi — A High Court in Nairobi has ordered the freezing of bank accounts Judiciary Chief Registrar Anne Amadi's name in a gold fraud case involving her law firm.
In orders issued on Thursday, the court extended conservatory orders freezing Amadi's assets to her son Brain Amadi who runs the law firm Amadi and Associates Advocates.
Further, the Deputy Registrar in the Commercial and Tax mandated financial institutions where affected accounts are domiciled to report any activity not directly sanctioned by the court.
The temporary orders followed a suit by Demetrow Bradshaw, a British citizen, who alleged fraud after paying Amadi and Associates $742,206 (Sh102,090,435), for the supply of 1,500kg consignment of gold bars which turned out to be hot air.
Bradshaw through his company Bruton Gold Trading LLC sued Amadi, her son, lawyer Andrew Kiarie, lawyer Adrian Topoti, businessman Daniel Kangara alias Dan Muriithi and Liberian national Edward Taylor alias Mboronda Seyenkulo Sakor.
"She is among those who orchestrated a fraudulent scheme to obtain money by false pretence through her law firm Amadi and Associates Advocates. They received the funds and hurriedly withdrew them in cash without adequate supporting documentation," said Bradshaw.
He said he lost the money and never received the gold consignment.
ABC accounts
In response to the businessman's complaints, the court also froze two accounts at ABC Bank linked to Amadi and Associates Advocates.
"Pending the hearing and determination of the suit, the court also issues an order that the personal bank accounts belonging to Amadi, her son and the other two respondents be frozen. They should not withdraw any amount from the accounts without court's permission," the court affirmed.
It was further directed that "account number 011215011005999 and 01123900100506 domicile at ABC Bank, Green House Mall Nairobi, in the name of Amadi and Associates, advocates be frozen and that no funds whatsoever should be withdrawn from accounts without the courts orders."
Bradshaw filed the lawsuit through lawyer Murage Juma, stating that Taylor had connected him to Kangara as someone who dealt in gold export when his company was interested in purchasing gold from Kenya in September 2021.
They then signed an agreement in which Kangara would deliver the 1,500kg gold consignment to his company in Dubai upon payment of the agreed purchase price of $742,206 (Sh102,090,435).
"On the understanding that Kangara could deliver the gold consignment through his company Universal Global Logistics Limited, Bradshaw entered into the transaction where he was represented by the law firm of Amadi and Associates Advocates," said Juma.
Bradshaw's lawyer told the court that between September 22, 2021, and October 21, 2021, the Briton sent the first instalment totaling $592,970 (Sh81,563,023) to Amadi's law firm and completed the balance of $149,236 (Sh20,527,411) in November.
False declaration
Bradshaw claimed that he received six documents from Kangara to prove that he had sent the gold to Dubai after paying Amadi & Associates Advocates, only to find out that they were fictitious and fake documents.
"No gold was ever exported from Kenya and when he inquired why the gold consignment was not on the flight to Dubai, he was told that the consignment had been taken off the plane as there were some more payments to be made," Bradshaw's lawyer argued in suit papers.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
When the Briton insisted on receiving his gold, Kangara and Taylor are reported to have informed him that his business, Bruton Gold Trading LLC, had been sued before the High Court and that a court order had been issued prohibiting the transfer of gold to him.
"On May 10 2022, Amadi's law firm wrote to the plaintiff's advocates and attached two cheques worth $9,000 (Sh1,237,950) as a commitment towards resolving the matter," said Juma.
He alleged that Amadi called the Briton's lawyer after the meeting and offered to pay the rest in six months, but that her proposal was turned down since she had not provided any security.
The lawyer added that since the defendants had failed to make any further commitment on repaying his money, he wants the court to order them to deposit the funds within 14 days so that he gets back his money.
Respondents were given three days to respond to the suit ahead of a scheduled hearing on May 23.
