In message <CAPjmBy3v_vR_HjrwryhP5apY8=pmnepk1yjqpymwosfzqrj...@mail.gmail.com> Ali Hussein <[email protected]> wrote:
>I have been following this saga for a few days now and I can't help but >wonder (And this is aside from discussing the case of Cloud Innovation and >AfriNIC) I want to address the process of Mauritian law. > >How does a court in Mauritius freeze the bank accounts of another company >through ex parte proceedings? That is rather a serious mystery to me too. I guess that the court was worried... as some courts might reasonably worry in the case of some defendants... that *if* the defendant company was given some pre-notice of the impending freeze of its bank accounts, then the organization might try to evade the effects of such a freeze by quickly withdrawing all of its funds and placing those funds somewhere else. According to the following page which describes the typical procedures as they occur under the U.S. judicial system... https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/frozen-bank-accounts.html "Most creditors need to file a lawsuit and get a judgment against you before freezing your bank account. If the creditor wins the suit, the court issues a money judgment to the creditor. This money judgment serves as proof of the amount owed and protects debtors from having money taken that they don't owe. Once a creditor has the judgment against you, if you haven't taken steps to pay the judgment or agreed to a payment schedule for satisfying the debt, the judgment creditor can request that the court issue an order that directs the bank to freeze your account." I believe that the procedures are the same in most civilized countries, i.e. a party must *first* win a case and only *then* they may arrange to have the other party's bank accounts frozen or seized. I do not want to pre-judge the situation based on limited information, but offhand, and based on what few facts we have, it would seem to be reasonable to speculate that Mauritian law is different from U.S. law (and the law in many other jurisdictions) in that Mauritian law apparently does not actually require a party to win damages in court before a bank account of an opposing party may be frozen. (Whatever different rule the Mauritians are using with respect to asset freezes, it must surely be an absolute delight for any and all Mauritian plaintiffs!) Whether that is the best way to run a national legal system or not is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. All I can say for sure is that at this moment I am really quite glad that I personally do not own any bank accounts in Mauritius. >How else do you interpreter this? A court >giving an unprecedented ex parte ruling against an African Organization in >favor of a Hongkong-based organization who we are all clear is a purveyor >of African IP Addresses to organizations outside of Africa as its core >business model. I am sorry to have to correct you sir, but I believe that there is at least one serious inaccuracy in your comment above. To the best of my knowledge, Cloud Innovation, Ltd. is *not* "Hong Kong based" in the sense that its home jurisdiction... the jurisdiction in which it is actually incorporated... is, I believe, the Seychelles Islands, not Hong Kong. A Hong Kong based legal entity would never have qualified to become a member of AFRINIC. As far as I know, AFRINIC memberships have only been granted to legal entities that are actually "domiciled" within the AFRINIC geographical region. (Hong Kong is quite clearly outside of that region, while the Seychelles Islands are most definitely within the region.) It appears that at one point in time, Cloud Innovation, Ltd. may also have existed as a Mauritian legal entity, however the Mauritian legal entity with that name appears to have been wound up some time ago, which is probably just as well since, as I understand it, "international companies" may be formed in Mauritius, even if they have only very limited physical presence there (and pay minimal or no taxes there) however the downside is that such "international" Mauritian companies are not allowed, under law, to actually conduct business with -actual- Mauritian resident companies, for example, AFRINIC. Thus, an "offshore" company called "Cloud Innovation, Ltd." and incorporated in the Seychelles Islands is rather vastly superior to an offshore company called Cloud Innovation, Ltd." and incorporated in Mauritius, at least if the company wishes/wished to transact business with some actual Mauritian-resident company such as AFRINIC. https://opencorporates.com/companies/mu/C115736 >Let's put aside all this hullabaloo of ohh...The board didn't do >this...Oooh the board should have done this! and let's address the elephant >in the room. Everything else is a sideshow. The freezing of the bank accounts is most certainly a truly startling development and one that would most certainly NOT have happened in the United States, or, I expect, in most other civilized countries, at least not prior to a full trial on the merits and the actual conclusion of the over-arching legal case. I have previously mentioned other reasons that I and others might have for harboring displeasure with respect to the Mauritian legal system. There is no need for me to repeat those now, and in fact I have been cautioned against doing so again out of concern that either I or some AFRRINIC staff members might, as a result, be convicted of the heinous offense of "disrespecting the court" and that we might thus find ourselves dragged away in chains to what is no doubt some special Mauritian dark and dank dungeon specially reserved for offenders of such a unique caliber. Regards, rfg _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
