Durban - A sheriff of the court will have to go to Nkandla to draft a list of moveable assets to be attached after the Pietermaritzburg High Court this week granted summary judgment against former president Jacob Zuma.
The matter was brought to the court by VBS Mutual Bank curator Anoosh Rooplal to compel Zuma to repay the loan spent on upgrades to his home in Nkandla.
The original loan amount was R6.5 million, but with interest the amount outstanding is R7.8m.
The order relates to former public protector Thuli Madonsela’s 2014 report, which found that when security improvements were made at Zuma’s home, a number of structures were built at state expense that were not related to security. These included a cattle enclosure, chicken run and visitor centre, a theatre and a swimming pool, passed off as a “fire pool”.
The Constitutional Court ordered that Zuma pay for the upgrades at his home, and in September 2016, Zuma signed a loan agreement with VBS Mutual Bank to cover the repayments. Zuma, however, denied he had acted dishonestly over the upgrade.
By 2018 Zuma had defaulted on the loan, and the bank’s liquidators went to court. This week, the Pietermaritzburg High Court issued a default order, stating that: “Summary judgment is granted against the first respondent, and the first respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the sum of R6.5m, together with interest at 10.25% per annum from 31 August 2019 to the date of final payment, both days inclusive. The first respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application on an attorney and client scale,” the order reads.
On Tuesday, the Jacob Zuma Foundation issued a statement saying they and Zuma would study the judgment and consult their legal team.
Legal expert Mpumelelo Zikalala said Zuma could exercise two options:
“He could tell the court that he was unaware that the application was taking place, and he could ask for time to defend himself and ask for the order to be suspended. This would depend on who the papers were served on and who signed for them.”
Zikalala said Zuma could also argue that there was a reasonable prospect of success in defending the matter. VBS’s curator cannot attach the immovable property in Nkandla because it is built on tribal land owned by the Ingonyama Trust.
He said the Trust was an innocent bystander in the matter, and would only get involved to protect its assets – the land or the buildings themselves.
“They don’t need to get involved unless the judgment affects the land or immovable property. For now, they can leave it to the two parties involved.”
He said items, like chairs and tables, could be attached, but not personal amenities like clothing or beds.
Rooplal said: “As the liquidator, our role requires us to pursue and collect all outstanding monies owed to VBS. These include all clients who have been defaulting on paying back their loans and mortgages due to VBS.
“These recoveries are for the benefit of the creditors of the bank.
“Where repeated attempts to secure payments from clients result in no money being received, we have no choice, but to pursue the legal route to recover money owed to the bank.
“Our next steps are to understand what movable assets can be attached to repay this debt. Since the Nkandla homestead was built on community land, we are unable to attach any immovable property.”
Rooplal’s spokesperson, Louise Brugman, confirmed that the court had granted a default judgment and that R7.8m was owed to the bank as a result of interest charges.
“The Sheriff of the Court will go to Nkandla to draft the list of moveable assets to be attached.
“When this takes place is up for them to decide,” said Brugman.