- Bradshaw, the director of Bruton Gold Trading LLC, obtained orders freezing the law firm’s bank accounts and those of Amadi two weeks ago.
- The money in question was meant for the purchase of 1,500kg of gold bars but the consignment never arrived in Dubai.
Image: EZEKIEL AMING'A
A commercial court will on Friday this week determine if it will set aside orders freezing personal bank accounts of chief registrar Anne Amadai who is embroiled in a Sh130 million gold scandal.
Yesterday, gold trader Demetrios Bradshow urged Justice Alfred Mabeya to dismiss the application filed by Amadi, saying she is still the registered proprietor of Amadi and Associates Advocates that is at the centre of the scandal.
Through Murage Juma and Company Advocates, Bradshow told the court that any action in recovery of the money has to be taken against the registered proprietor of the said law firm, which does not have a separate legal personality from Amadi.
Bradshaw, the director of Bruton Gold Trading LLC, obtained orders freezing the law firm’s bank accounts and those of Amadi two weeks ago.
The money in question was meant for the purchase of 1,500kg of gold bars but the consignment never arrived in Dubai.
Also frozen were accounts belonging to her son Brian Ochieng, Advocate Andrew Kiarie and Kikanae Topoti, who are advocates in the law firm. The court further froze the accounts of one David Kangara, the gold exporter and one Edward Tyalor the alleged gold vendor.
Amadi has since asked the court to set aside the order, saying she ceased practising as an advocate with the firm following her appointment as CRJ in 2014.
The law firm was registered on November 9, 2012. She said the firm remained dormant until her son, Ochieng, Kiarie and Toptoi took up the management and operations of the firm. The three are advocates of the High Court of Kenya.
Amadi, through advocate Ochieng Oduol, says that when she resigned, the three opted to retain the firm’s name Amadi and Associates Advocates.
Ochieng’ and Kiarie were also made signatories to the firm’s bank accounts to enable them continue to offer legal services to clients. The firm consequently opened two account numbers at African Banking Corporation Limited at Green House on June 10, 2020.
"Following the opening of the bank accounts, I had no further dealings with the firm. I am not a signatory to the accounts and have no role in the firm and I do not draw any income or profit from the firm since my taking the leave of absence in January 2014,” she says.
Amadi says has been condemned unheard and the orders freezing her accounts should be set aside.
Ochieng and Kiarie, on the other hand, have claimed that they did not sign any agreement with Bruton for the delivery of the gold worth more than Sh100 million. They said they only provided the services of an escrow account to the Dubai based firm.
But Bradshow asked told Mabeya to dismiss Amadi's application on grounds that there is a risk of all the money held by Amadi being removed from the jurisdiction of this court.
In his affidavit before court, Bradshow says “It is flabbergasting that Amadi, an advocate and employee of the Judiciary can term the theft of more than $742,000 as a feigned disuse and a fraud against her when it is I that is the victim of the fraud.”
He also says there is no evidence of any attempt made to secure a change of registration details for the firm nor an application to transfer the business name.
“Unless Anne Atieno Amadi can prove that she is not the registered proprietor of Amadi and Associates, any claim made against the firm which cannot be separated from its registered proprietor, lands squarely at her feet, regardless of whichever office she hold,” Bradshow said.
In closing, Amadi, through her advocate, told the court that there is no evidence that the monies in question were paid to her personal bank accounts between September and October 2021 as alleged.
“There is a difference between the firm's accounts and the personal accounts. The impression created here is that that Amadi has been trading in gold, which is false," the advocate said.
“We submit that this suit has been filed for the collateral purpose of adverse publicity against my client. Bruton never dealt with my client and therefore there is no case made for an injunction.”