Cracks appear in ‘holy matrimony’

According to documents in the Herald’s possession, Biovision (Pty) Ltd has accused the erstwhile Ventersdorp municipality of breach of contract in the mass roll-out of energy saving technology and is suing the municipality for R50 million in damages.

Willie Maphosa, the council spokesperson explained that Biovision had instituted the action in the Pretoria High Court in August 2017.

‘The municipality disputed liability, opposed the claim and lodged an application to set the summons aside as an irregular proceeding. This application was successful and Acting Judge Moosa set the summons aside on 18 July 2017.

‘In circumstances that are presently under investigation, Biovision erroneously obtained a default judgment against the municipality for payment on 29 August 2017. ‘The prior setting aside of the summons precluded any default judgment but it was apparently not brought to the attention of the presiding judge who granted the judgment.

‘The municipality only became aware of the application for default judgment when the sheriff arrived. As the judgment was erroneously granted, the municipality then lodged an application for it to be revoked and an urgent application to suspend the execution of the judgment in the meantime.

‘The urgent suspension application was enrolled in the Pretoria High Court on Friday, 22 September 2017. The council’s interdict was successful and the writ of execution stayed until the final hearing on our application for rescission of the default judgment,’ said Maphosa. ‘Biovision will pay our legal costs in this respect.’

Hans-Jurie Moolman, the DA Caucus chairperson says the litigation had taken the rest of the councillors by surprise. ‘We have never received any reports from the council to consider this and neither were we informed about any pending litigation.

‘The attachment of the property is the result of litigation that already exists. That means that summonses were issued and the municipality failed to respond or defend the matter. That is why the judgment was obtained and the property was subsequently attached. ‘In the same vein we, as councillors, are deeply concerned about the amount that is being claimed and, in fact, we are not even aware of the cause of this claim. We do not know whether we have any defence or who is going to pay for the legal costs. We don’t even know why there is a litigation against the council,’ he said.

Moolman says they have written to the executive mayor requesting answers. According to him, there is also evidence that a contract was concluded with a company called Cigicell in Ventersdorp. This is also up for a legal challenge that may amount to millions, too.

‘It is high time that the mayor, municipal manager, and the speaker start playing open cards with all the councillors because we are responsible for the finances of the local government. We need answers and the sooner they start explaining the better because we are not going to take this lightly,’ he said.

When all said and done, it seems that the merger between the two municipalities that the executive mayor termed ‘holy matrimony’ at the time, is showing signs of deep distress.