[ad_1]
One reason for exception raised by the brothers was that the attorney who signed the details of the claim was not authorized to sign the briefs.
They said that a lawyer who signs a combined subpoena is required to affirm that he possesses a certificate issued by the registrar of the higher court to which he was admitted that entitles him to the right to appear in higher court.
“The details of the plaintiffs ‘claim do not affirm that the signatory to the plaintiffs’ claim details is authorized to sign pleadings and / or has the right to appear in higher court,” the lawyers for the two brothers said in the notice. of exception. filed in court on October 1.
The Gupta brothers said in their claim details, Eskom and SIU raised seven claims (A to G) against Molefe, former Eskom CFO Anoj Singh, former Eskom COO Matshela Koko, former Eskom legal officer Suzanne Daniels, former government minister Mosebenzi Zwane, former Eskom board chairman Ben Ngubane, and former Eskom board member Chwayitha Mabude.
He said the eighth claim, Claim H, was against all defendants jointly and severally as an alternative to claims A to G.
“However, H in the details of the lawsuit seeks an order ordering Ngubane, being the sixth defendant, to make the payment to the plaintiffs.”
Attorneys said relief was not sought in the details of the lawsuit against the two Gupta brothers.
“The combined summons issued to the plaintiffs accordingly does not reveal any cause of action that is valid and legally valid against (Rajesh Gupta) and / or (Ajay Gupta) for any of the reasons stated above.”
They are also asking the court to order Eskom and the SIU to pay the costs of this exception.
TimesLIVE
[ad_2]
