Tweet
Cash Plus remains an NCB customer
published: Friday | January 18, 2008
HILL
The Carlos Hill-led [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Cash [COLOR=orange! important]Plus[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Ltd. will continue to be a customer of the National [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Commercial [COLOR=orange! important]Bank[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] (NCB) as the Court of Appeal yesterday ordered that nine of 26 accounts must not be closed.
An injunction, in relation to the nine accounts, is to remain in force until the matter returns to the Supreme Court on January 24. Cash Plus will then apply for the injunction to be extended until the trial.
NCB had filed an appeal seeking to have the injunction discharged in respect of the 26 accounts, but was only successful in having the appeal allowed in part.
Attorney-at-law Dave Garcia, general manager of general counsel and special projects at NCB, said while the bank had hoped the injunction would have been discharged entirely, they were "very pleased, especially with the direction that the matter is to proceed on January 24".
The Court of Appeal directed the Supreme Court to hear the application for the interlocutory injunction on January 24. The court said further that the hearing was to proceed even if the claim which Cash Plus had brought against the [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Financial [COLOR=orange! important]Services[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Commission (FSC) had not been been determined.
The suit, which Cash Plus has brought against the FSC, was heard in part last year, for continuation on January 23 in the Supreme Court.
Cash Plus is asking the court to determine whether the nature of its business requires it to be registered under the Securities Act. On December 28, the FSC issued a cease-and-desist order on Cash Plus, which is appealing the order.
In discharging the injunction yesterday, in respect of the 17 accounts for affiliated companies of Cash Plus, the Court of Appeal said those companies had not filed suits and there was no ostensible authority from them to enable Cash Plus to act on their behalf.
published: Friday | January 18, 2008
HILL
The Carlos Hill-led [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Cash [COLOR=orange! important]Plus[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Ltd. will continue to be a customer of the National [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Commercial [COLOR=orange! important]Bank[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] (NCB) as the Court of Appeal yesterday ordered that nine of 26 accounts must not be closed.
An injunction, in relation to the nine accounts, is to remain in force until the matter returns to the Supreme Court on January 24. Cash Plus will then apply for the injunction to be extended until the trial.
NCB had filed an appeal seeking to have the injunction discharged in respect of the 26 accounts, but was only successful in having the appeal allowed in part.
Attorney-at-law Dave Garcia, general manager of general counsel and special projects at NCB, said while the bank had hoped the injunction would have been discharged entirely, they were "very pleased, especially with the direction that the matter is to proceed on January 24".
The Court of Appeal directed the Supreme Court to hear the application for the interlocutory injunction on January 24. The court said further that the hearing was to proceed even if the claim which Cash Plus had brought against the [COLOR=orange! important][COLOR=orange! important]Financial [COLOR=orange! important]Services[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Commission (FSC) had not been been determined.
The suit, which Cash Plus has brought against the FSC, was heard in part last year, for continuation on January 23 in the Supreme Court.
Cash Plus is asking the court to determine whether the nature of its business requires it to be registered under the Securities Act. On December 28, the FSC issued a cease-and-desist order on Cash Plus, which is appealing the order.
In discharging the injunction yesterday, in respect of the 17 accounts for affiliated companies of Cash Plus, the Court of Appeal said those companies had not filed suits and there was no ostensible authority from them to enable Cash Plus to act on their behalf.