Arguments conclude in Krem/Ashcroft case
The case of Sagis Limited versus Krem Radio wound up today as lawyers for both sides presented their summations in the court of Chief Justice Abdulai Conteh. The picture painted by Sagis lead attorney Vincent Nelson, flown in from London for the occasion, was that of a simple contract in which one party—Krem Radio—reneged on its side of the bargain. In 1994, he said, Krem was in financial trouble, and through the good offices of lawyer Said Musa, a “rescue operation” was launched by Sagis—a company affiliated with the Ashcroft group and created solely for this transaction. The deal was for Sagis to lend Krem seventy-five thousand dollars and at the same time purchase for twenty-five thousand dollars, fifty thousand of the company’s shares—representing ten percent of its equity—from chairman and largest shareholder Evan X Hyde. Hyde, on the advice of his father and fellow director Charles B. Hyde, signed the share transfer agreement and collected the hundred thousand dollars … but Krem never did register the transfer of the shares. In his argument this morning Nelson went one step further to say that based on yesterday’s testimony from C.B. Hyde, Evan X never had any intention to transfer the shares. When he sought to formally amend the complaint to include allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation, however, the Chief Justice denied the request without prejudice, saying it would take the case into a whole different realm.
As a remedy Nelson said his clients want the court to order Krem to register the fifty thousand shares for Sagis, a move that would give Sagis the right to demand information from Krem’s management concerning the state of the company’s financial affairs.
The case for Krem, presented by Senior Counsel Michael Young, focused primarily on one issue. He maintained that according to company law and Krem’s own articles of association, no shares could be sold to an outsider until all existing shareholders were first given the opportunity to match the offer of the prospective buyer. Since this was not done, nor did the shareholders agree to waive this pre-emption right, Young maintained that there could be no legal sale. If Sagis wanted to obtain the shares they could still have Krem’s shareholders go through the pre-emption process and if any or all of them decided to buy the shares they could pay Evan X Hyde, who would then give back the twenty-five thousand dollars in proceeds to Sagis. Young further told the court that in the absence of a believable explanation as to why Sagis failed to pursue the matter for the last thirteen years, the court would also have to conclude that the action was simply motivated by malice, as Sagis had recently turned down an offer by Krem to repay the twenty-five thousand dollars plus “reasonable interest.”
Today, following the hearing, attorney Nelson declined to discuss the case. Krem’s Mose Hyde, however, felt no such constraints.
Evan “Mose” Hyde, Krem Radio
“Ultimately, it’s a very serious judgement because we are pretty sure we know what is the long-term intent of our opponents. They want to secure a seat to create mischief and destruction. So it’s an important judgement and we are pretty confident, we believe our attorneys did a very good job and now it’s in the hands of the judge.”
Jules Vasquez, Channel Seven
“Are you intimidated by the formidable resolve and the resources of your opponent that this court is just one stop?”
Evan “Mose” Hyde
“We would be a fool not to be, Jules. I think ultimately that’s very daunting to us; the fact that this guy can take us back and forth across the Atlantic and we’re quite sure that he intends to if it doesn’t go his way. But ultimately for us, it’s important for the people to get a sense of what’s involved there. I the court of public opinion is important and I think it’s important for people to understand the mindset and what ultimately are the objectives here. I mean when a billionaire becomes so consumed by poor lee Krem and our lee ten percent and twenty-five thousand to the point that he brings in his foreign dream team it says about where he wants to go. Imagine, I mean it’s incredible.”
Stewart Krohn
“Mose, do you think this case will be decided strictly on the merits of very narrow business law or do you think Chief Justice will take into account, the larger issues that you have raised publicly?”
Evan “Mose” Hyde
“I know very little about the Supreme Court, I’ve spent very little time around and understanding the mindset or how a judge goes about doing what he does. I can say that in the spirit of where we are, we believe that this is ultimately malice, we have expressed and in fact, it’s a matter of evidence that we are willing to give back the twenty-five thousand dollars with interest. We just don’t have any interest to be infected by the type of viral presence that is Michael Ashcroft and the companies that he owns and controls at this point in time. I think looking back in retrospect, somebody might say but you did have contact with him in 1994. It amounts to almost getting married but not consummating the marriage and then finding years down the road that you know what it was divine intervention that you didn’t because then that person is infected with some stuff you wouldn’t want to have gotten your own damn self. So at this point in time, we don’t want to be forced to lie down with him, point blank.”
Chief Justice Conteh reserved judgment in the case until an as yet to be determined date. It should be noted that in 1991, the Ashcroft group negotiated a similar deal to fund the establishment of this station, Channel Five. A company controlled by Michael Ashcroft purchased a twenty percent stake in Great Belize Productions Limited and a loan facility was provided by the Ashcroft owned Belize Bank. That arrangement has run smoothly over the last seventeen years with all loans being repaid and the minority shareholder has not sought to exert any influence over broadcasting operations.
