Post Office, Mampeule enter new standoff

So then who lied?

I suggest the Bowman senior partners get the answer.

(Dave Loxton, Bowman Gilfillan - Post Office’s lawyer to SAPO Board 11 June 2006 – Page 21 paragraph 1)

“… And the Chairperson was as you know an independent advocate from the Johannesburg Bar (Advocate Mark Antrobus), he found as much. He said the evidence is overwhelming that a fraud was perpetrated and that there was – well, as he termed it, it was a breathtaking activity on the part of Mabote with the connivance of the other executives as well. So we’re not just making an assumption here, we have a lot of evidence in our pocket.”

OR

”Khutso Mampeule 06 June 2006 (Letter to all Post Office Board Members – Page 2 paragraph 10)

Vision Design House Arbitration Proceedings Update;

Quoting (Advocate Mark Antrobus) – “The fact that there was an orchestrated scheme involving these players to defraud the company was not the central focus of the evidence presented against Mabote. On the evidence led before me, I am not able to conclude with any certainty that there was such a group of persons actively engaged in assisting each other in a plan to defraud the Post Office and cover over each others tracks.

There is in my view insufficient evidence before me to make a finding that there probably was an orchestrated scheme involving the other named individuals as suggested by the company”.

For my client the answer is irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X