Victor Cohen estate: Warring parties ordered to go to trial
THE family of the late businessman, Victor Cohen, has been ordered to go to trial for proper ventilation of their dispute over control of Waverley Plastics.
Cohen’s two daughters, Mrs Amanda Berkowitz (nee Cohen) and Mrs Belynda Halfon (nee Cohen) are challenging the alleged fraudulent takeover of the multi-million-dollar family business by their nephew, Mr Aron Vico.
In a High Court judgment handed down last week, Justice Mary Zimba-Dube ruled that the family feud over the business empire could not be resolved by way of an application, citing glaring disputes of fact existing on the papers.
She decided not to throw out the application, but instead allowed the disputes arising from both the application and the counter claim by Vico to be fully ventilated at trial.
“My view is that the proper course to take is to have the application as well as the counter-claim converted into trial proceedings so that evidence can be led on all disputed facts,” she ruled.
This means the two siblings’ application has been converted to action proceedings or summons in this matter.
In terms of the law, application proceedings envisage the presentation of facts and evidence in affidavits that will be read by a judge before hearing arguments in court on the issues raised in the affidavits, whereas action proceedings envisage the presentation of facts and evidence verbally in court during a trial.
Justice Zimba Dube said the court was faced with a challenge regarding the existence of disputes of fact appearing on papers, hence the need for proper ventilation of the dispute.
“My conclusion is that there are material disputes of fact appearing on the papers which need to be properly ventilated to enable the court to determine whether the relief sought can in fact be granted,” she said.
In their application, Mrs Berkowitz and Mrs Halfon wanted an order declaring the issue and allotment of shares in Waverley Plastics to Vico and their father invalid. The duo wanted an order declaring that the shareholding in the company at the centre of dispute did not change as a result of the purported issue and allotment of shares, as well as that the CR2 return of allotment filed with the Registrar of Deeds be nullified. In his counter-argument, Vico claimed that the Cohen sisters were appointed directors to the company without any meeting of shareholders and never assumed any shares in the company.