Former DPP Mutembo Nchito

KONKOLA Copper Mines provisional liquidator Milingo Lungu has objected to the appointment of Messers Nchito and Nchito by Vedanta Resources and KCM board chairman Srinivasan Venkatakrishnan of London as their legal representatives.

Mr Lungu in an affidavit in support of motion to raise preliminary issues states that he objects because Nchito and Nchito were representing Barclays Bank in a matter where it had sued KCM claiming a sum of US$2,998,720.34.

“On February 26, 2019, Messrs Nchito and Nchito caused to be issued a writ of summons on behalf of Barclay’s Bank PLC against KCM as a respondent under cause number 2019/HPC/0069. Under the said cause number 2019/HPC/0069, Barclays is claiming bargain at KCM, amongst others payment of US$2,998,720.34,” he stated.

Mr Lungu also stated that “by the respondents’ Articles of Association, neither the chairman nor any director of the respondent has the power to appoint a lawyer for and on behalf of the respondent (KCM) without a board resolution.”

Mr Lungu contended that entertaining the mining firm’s board chairman’s motion would amount to entertaining a person that had circumvented or ignored the framework provided by the law within which he might be accorded an opportunity of being heard by the court.

“Consequently, the respondent will pray for the dismissal of the motion by the chairman for being incompetent on account of the absence of the appropriate notice having been filed or given, in any case,” Mr Lungu stated.

And lawyers retained by Mr Lungu stated that the mining firm was seeking a determination on whether Messrs Nchito and Nchito were not conflicted and thereby precluded from acting as advocates of the respondent.

The provisional liquidator is also seeking the court’s determination on whether a sole director and chairman of the board of directors of a company in liquidation had residual powers to instruct an advocate to represent a company where a provisional liquidator had been appointed.

On June 6, Messrs Nchito and Nchito filed a notice to raise preliminary issue on a point of law on behalf of Vedanta.

Nchito & Nchito want the court to determine whether Messrs Ellis and Company, Messrs Makebi Zulu Advocates, Messrs Andrew Musukwa and Co and Messrs DH Kemp and Co who were appointed by Mr Lungu could appear on behalf of KCM to support or oppose the appointment of the provisional liquidator and the winding up petition.

Vedanta is also seeking a determination on whether a confirmation of the provisional liquidation could be done without KCM and or its directors being heard through lawyers of their choice.

[Read 5,524 times, 1 reads today]
Loading...

16 COMMENTS

  1. The only rrason they are objecting is because they know that Mutembo, unlike them, is a competent lawyer. He will have them for breakfast lunch and supper.

    23

    51
    • This is laughable. Why should a prosecutor object to my choice of lawyer?

      Are they afraid that the Nchito brothers will expose their corruption that led to this move.

      9

      42
    • Does Mutembo’s acceptance of instructions from Vedanta act against Barclays in the matter they have been sued by Barclays with Mutembo as lawyer again? I don’t see how but it is looking interesting and I am no expert in these things.

      5

      0
    • THERE ARE NO MORALS FOR LAWYERS EXCEPT MAKING MONEY.
      AND THEY ARE GREEDY AND MERCILESS.
      THEY WILL SUP WITH THE DEVIL ANY TIME FOR FILTHY LUCRE.

      0

      0
  2. This is where lawyers will chew their clients money.

    Mutembo is chasing money from KCM on behalf of Barclays. On the other hand the same Mutembo is representing KCM against the government.

    Down the road, there will be an entrapment.

    This indicates how long this case will bounce in the walls, ceiling boards and corridors if courts.

    Amen !!!

    26

    2
    • Suppose another person approached Mutembo to act for them against Barclays. Would that qualify as conflict of interest?

      6

      0
  3. As long as Mutembo is involved we are in for a lengthy winding and twisting litigation. Mutembo ni mambala wa mafunde kabili ni kanyekanye. You’ve just provoked him. Since a provisional liquidator has already been appointed I see another Post Newspaper case in making. ZIALE has produced so many legal engineers.

    28

    1
    • LT stop fudging with the thumbs up and down numbers….We know wordpress can easily be manipulated.LET THE PEOPLES VIEWS BE HEARD.

      1

      2
  4. BIG BRU MUTEMBO NCHITO IAM 100% BEHIND YOU. GO FOR IT. NOT THESE SILLY LAWYERS WHO JUST WANT TO BRING CONFUSION AND STEAL FROM CLIENTS.

    3

    15
  5. Vendata are mafias. They want to win this case at whatever cost because they know what is at stake in the event that they win it. So they want the best lawyer, even if that lawyer is against them on some barclays claim. USD 3 Million. How many clients does this company owe!

    4

    -1
  6. Why is the PF lawyer is using a technicality to stop the Nchito’s from being legal representatives of Vedanta in the case?
    Why not stick to their earlier flawed argument that there is no provision in law for Vedanta to be joined in the liquidation case?
    THESE PF GUYS ARE REAL MAFIAS.THIS LEVEL OF DESPERATION IS WORRYING.
    What are the PF afraid of?

    3

    3
  7. I don’t get it. Why should Lungs object to someone’s choice of lawyers? Nchito has never represented KCM so what is the fuss. ??

    1

    2
    • The fuss is that Nchito is representing Barclays to wrestle cash out of KCM and at the same time Nchito should represent KCM against the government. Its like Nchito squeezing KCM bolls on behalf of Barclays and then the same Nchito squeezing boma bolls for KCM. it does not make sense to me.
      Disaster!!!

      1

      0
  8. Let’s put politics away for a moment. Every Zambian should be saying, Vendata must go. Full stop.

    1

    0

Comments are closed.