Windhoek
The dust refuses to settle on the contentious issue of the ownership of Witvlei Abattoir, as the two main players in the saga continue to cross swords.
This time Witvlei Meat is asking the High Court to restore possession of the premises to it after the Agricultural Bank of Namibia (AgriBank) took possession of the premises, situated at the village of Witvlei near Gobabis in August last year.
According to papers before court, AgriBank instructed the deputy sheriff of Gobabis to secure the premises “without following good process of law” and removed the applicant, thereby spoiling its uninterrupted peaceful and undisturbed, as well as vacant possession of the property between August 2006 and August 5, 2015.
Sidney Martin, chairman of the Board of Witvlei Meat, said in his affidavit that Witvlei Meat was in possession of the abattoir since a lease agreement – which incorporated a right of purchase – was entered into between AgriBank and Witvlei Meat.
He said the right of purchase was exercised in 2010, but the bank has ever since frustrated the process, culminating in the unlawful and forceful removal of the applicant from the property, with the unauthorised assistance of the deputy sheriff of Gobabis.
According to Martin, Witvlei Meat had factual control over the property “in that all necessary keys giving access to such property and the buildings situated on the property were in possession and/or accessible to the applicant and not the respondent”.
He further said Witvlei Meat ceased operations during November/December 2014 because of a lack of quota, but intended to restart operations in September/October last year after it secured a quota to provide meat to Wallmart and the Chinese market.
He further said he secured financing from Bank Windhoek to complete the purchase of the abattoir, but according to Martin the unlawful actions of AgriBank effectively locked Witvlei Meat out of the premises which constitutes spoliation. He wants the court to redress the situation.
Advocate John-Paul Jones appeared on behalf of Witvlei Meat, on instructions of Mueller Legal Practitioners, and informed the court that no genuine dispute of fact was established on the possession of the property. He said on the respondents’ own admission they were in joint possession of the property, which is contradictory to its claims that the applicant abandoned the property and that AgriBank acted to safeguard the property from vandals and thieves.
He further said it is denied by the respondents that the applicant’s employees and security personnel were at all relevant times at the premises and were removed by the deputy sheriff.
Mabushandje Ntinda from Sisa Namandje Inc. who appeared on behalf of AgriBank, said Witvlei Meat cannot claim spoliation as they abandoned the property shortly after June 26, 2015. He contended there is a material dispute as to whether the applicant was in undisturbed possession and in occupation of the property. According to him, AgriBank only took repossession of the property after the applicants failed to comply with the agreement between the bank and the applicant.
Judge Collins Parker, who heard the matter, was of the opinion that the only issue to be determined is whether the repossession of the property by AgriBank was lawful or not. He is expected to deliver judgment on April 28.