Daily Nation seeks injunction dismissal
THE Daily Nation has asked the Ndola High Court to dismiss Wolle Mining Limited’s ex-parte and inter-parte
order of interim injunction restraining the tabloid from publishing articles which it claims are injurious to its reputation and character.
This is in a matter in which the company has dragged the tabloid to court for publications over its wrangles over its ownership with Israeli shareholder in Gemcanton Investments Holdings Limited which it claims were detrimental to its reputation and business.
But in its defence and counter claim filed in the High Court, the tabloid charged that Wolle’s claims must not be entertained due to various court proceedings, court orders, arbitral award, worldwide freezing orders, emails, letters, and communication involving the sale of emerald, lack of transparency and shareholder disputes that had culminated into various litigation.
“The defendants will also avail that the 2nd plaintiff (Abdoulaye Ndiaye) did move assets and shares in a number of companies in total breach of the London Court order that prohibited him from doing so and therefore, is a very dishonest person without any reputation to protect.
“The defendants will avail at trial that the 2nd plaintiff did admit in written statements that he formulated “sham” agreements for purpose of moving monies in banks when the agreements were never intended to be honoured. Such acts amount to crookedness, dishonesty, and utmost, moneylaundering,” reads the defence in part. The tabloid says it will rely on widely reported arbitral award against Mr. Ndiaye in which he has been ordered to pay US$ 50 million plus interest and costs for failure to deliver emeralds to the purchaser who paid him in full for the goods. “His failure to deliver the goods was dishonest and therefore, he has no reputation,” reads the defence.
The tabloid has also maintained that the statements contained in various articles against the plaintiff were justified.
“The defendant now claims for a declaration that the defendant’s statements contained in various articles on the plaintiff are the truth and therefore justified under the defence of justification and a declaration that some of the articles are a production of the court proceedings and records and therefore, protected under the Law of Privilege,” reads the counter claim in part.