Independent Newspapers
President Jacob Zumas son, Edward, facing a sequestration application in the Durban High Court, has paid the R450 000 or so that he still owed his wedding co-ordinators.
Durban – He claims to have no assets whatsoever, but Edward Zuma, son of President Jacob Zuma, is accused of being a man of “substantial means”, involved in 25 companies and close corporations, who is hiding his wealth from his creditors.
“His conduct is typical of a debtor who is intent on avoiding his creditors,” said Paul Mann, of event planner Functions for Africa, who remains out of pocket after organising Zuma’s plush wedding in October 2011.
Mann, who got judgment against Zuma last year for R1.5 million and costs and interest for the unpaid wedding bill, was back in the Durban High Court on Monday with an application for the sequestration of Zuma.
The matter was adjourned, with Mann’s advocate, Indhrasen Pillay, informing Judge Dhaya Pillay that there were “attempts to resolve the matter”.
Had the sequestration order been granted, it would have meant Zuma would have had to resign from all directorships, including his partnership in UK-based airline Fastjet, which is supposed to start operations in South Africa soon.
In his affidavit before the court, Mann said Zuma had signed an acknowledgement of debt after he obtained judgment against him last year, but he had made “erratic payments”.
A schedule attached to the court papers reflects that he made monthly payments totalling R1.3m between June and November last year. But then payments stopped.
Without legal costs, which have yet to be calculated, he owes Mann about R450 000 as well as interest, which continues to accrue.
Mann says he sent the sheriff to Zuma’s home in Kentucky Drive, Durban North – which he described as “a property of some value” – to attach goods. A search carried out by The Mercury has shown that this property is owned by the Roy Moodley Family Trust.
“(The sheriff) went on numerous occasions. Finally, on March 19 this year, the sheriff came back with a nulla bona return, Zuma telling him that he was not the owner of any assets on the premises,” Mann said.
He said given that Zuma was a director and member of numerous corporate vehicles, it was probable that he was using these to shield his assets from his creditors.
“He is reported in newspapers to be a man of substantial means, having access to motor vehicles and properties – and yet there are no properties in his name. I believe that he has a substantial asset value but it has been secreted away, or moved into corporate vehicles to avoid creditors.
“I say this not as mere speculation, but based on his lifestyle, which is the subject of some notoriety… his wedding alone was of substantial opulence, with the bill for co-ordination in excess of R2.7m.”
Mann said sequestration would ensure that any assets could be retrieved and sold for the benefit of all creditors. He attached a list of dozens of companies and close corporations in which Zuma had or still had a stake.
Many of them were now deregistered or listed Zuma as having resigned.
In his earlier application for judgment, Mann said Zuma had made several empty promises to pay him, including claiming that he was getting foreign funding, about R28.8m from Deebo Holdings, a company owned by a relative, Sibusiso “Deebo” Mzobe.
Last week, Deebo Holdings was placed in liquidation following an application by a subcontractor complaining that it was owed R7m for a low-cost housing contract for which it had not been paid.
The Mercury
