Dorothy Brakspear Tears Into Nedbank’s Lawyer – Leornard Katz: BrakspearVNedbank

By Pinky Khoabane

Dorothy Brakspear (right) Leornard Katz (left. Pic from ENS Website)

THE BRAKSPEAR case against Nedbank has generated a lot of interest, with readers sending us the hardships they’ve experienced as a result of the partnership between Nedbank and it’s law firm Edward Nathan Sonnerbergs (ENS). We cannot publish unsubstantiated events and are terribly sorry that as a very small and highly under-resourced platform we cant follow up on what you’ve told us at this time.

In the Royal Court of Jersey, however, eighty-Three (83) year old Dorothy Brakspear, in her third affidavit presented to the court, does not spare ENS’ Leornard Katz. She accuses him of being the mastermind behind the R7 million “fictitious loans” which Nedbank said were owed by the Brakspears and which they used as a means of liquidating their business and having their farm sold to billionaire businessman Johann Rupert. She writes: “Mr Leonard Katz was the architect of the contrived liquidation of Westley trust only asset, by his drafting affidavits with false representations of

a) a fictitious £500,000 loan by Westley trust to West Dunes (Para 64 – 66 in Order of Justice) and

b) a fictitious £340,000 loan from Westley Holdings (BVI) to West Dunes (Para 72 – 75 in Order of Justice)”

The case was first heard in South African courts where Nedbank wasnt required to open its books for inspection to determine if the loan existed. However, the Jersey court has a Bankers’ Book Evidence law which allows such inspection and the Brakspears have been able to inspect the books and claim, as they had always contended, that there’s no trace of the said loan.

On ENS’ website, Leornard Katz’s biography reads: 

“”nothing focuses the mind like a liquidation”

“Practical Experience

Leonard Katz is a director in and head of ENSafrica’s insolvency, business rescue and debt recovery department. He specialises in recoveries for institutional and corporate clients and advises on debt restructuring and business recovery, debt recovery and the enforcement of securities, as well as conducting audits of clients’ securities.

Leonard has acted for banks and bank consortiums, and has represented liquidators and corporate clients in forensic investigations and formal inquiries….”

Here’s Dorothy Brakspear’s full affidavit:

  1. I have already filed two affidavits, the first of which is attached to our Order of Justice.
  2. My second affidavit was filed on 6 April 2018, and introduced new evidence that was previously denied to the Plaintiffs and which now proves conclusively that false representations (Para 63 – 75, 83 – 117 in the Order of Justice) were made by the Jersey trustee and it’s South African appointed agent Mr Nico Botha and by the South African appointed lawyers Mr Leonard Katz and Ms Justine Hoppe and which has caused us, the Plaintiffs, to suffer immeasurable financial losses and hardship.
  1. This third affidavit is in response to the supplementary affidavit filed Mr Leonard Charles Katz on 17 April 2018.
  2. I do not know if this late filing by Mr Leonard Katz of a second affidavit was proper and in line with the rules of the Jersey Court or what it has to do with the strike out application, other than try to defend his personal reputation.
  3. Even though I am not sure if Mr Leonard Katz has followed the correct procedure, for my own protection I am going to reply to his affidavit.
  4. But given the short notice period I have been unable to gather all the evidence from South Africa that supports what I have to say. However it is available should the Court require it?
  5. Mr Leonard Katz was the architect of the contrived liquidation of Westley trust only asset, by his drafting affidavits with false representations ofa) a fictitious £500,000 loan by Westley trust to West Dunes (Para 64 – 66 in Order of Justice) andb) a fictitious £340,000 loan from Westley Holdings (BVI) to West Dunes (Para 72 – 75 in Order of Justice).
  6. His second 126-page affidavit dated 13 April 2018 does not offer any evidence that would rebut the false representations.
  7. Instead Mr Leonard Katz offers a defence to his reputation, as a “fact” that is important enough to be addressed in a strike out application in Jersey?
  1. However I want to start my reply with a passage from the state of the nation address by the new President of South Africa, Mr Cyril Ramaphosa in 2018“We are determined to build a society defined by decency and integrity that does not tolerate the plunder of public resources, nor the theft by corporate criminals of the hard-earned savings of ordinary people”
  2. “Corporate criminals” abound in Africa and I am determined until my last breath, to take a stand against “rogue individuals from the corporate world ” such as the Jersey Trustee and their appointed attorney in South Africa, namely Mr Leonard Katz, who have plundered Brakspear family assets and who are now desperately trying to cover up this illegal plunder of our family assets.
  3. The very reason my late husband and I put our assets into a “trust”, was to protect them from rogue governments, like the former president of Zimbabwe, Mr Robert Mugabe.
  4. It seems that I have now encountered bigger rogues than Zimbabwe’s ex-President, being one or more persons from the Jersey Trustee and their South African lawyer Mr Leonard Katz.
  5. No person admits corruption or fraud when they are a party to that corruption or fraud, so it is to be expected that Mr Leonard Katz will vigorously deny any wrongdoing.
  6. I am not going to deal in detail, with the straw man arguments put forward by Mr Leonard Katz, where he extracts comments and provides a misinterpretation of what I say.
  7. Mr Leonard Katz has deliberately ignored the real facts and arguments in my affidavit and used the straw man fallacy to create a “pretend argument” and use that to misdirect away from his central role in various false representations to the South African Judiciary.
  1. The Jersey trustee and Mr Leonard Katz have taken a “£500,000 distribution” to a genuine beneficiary of a trust governed by Isle of Man law and fraudulently misrepresented that “distribution” in the South African Courts as a loan by a Jersey Bank to a Jersey Trust governed by Jersey law who in turned loaned it to a company in South Africa.
  2. Mr Leonard Katz role in those false representations to the South African Courts enabled him to plunder “Brakspear family money”, for millions of Rands in legal fees, yet we as beneficiaries received not one cent.
  3. I as a layman for the life of me, cannot see how any law allows for such criminal conduct by any persons with a fiduciary duty.
  4. As to Mr Leonard Katz role as the Jersey Trustee attorney, in Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan Shipping Corp. Lord Hoffman used the following words:“No one can escape liability for his fraud by saying “I wish to make it clear that I am committing this fraud on behalf of someone else and I am not to be personally liable.”
  5. A person who points a “knife” at someone and robs them of £100 can go to jail for a year. Yet here we have persons literately stealing hundreds of thousands of pounds by the use of a “pen” by swearing under oath in a signed affidavit to false representations.

South African Court proceedings in 2014 under Judge Kgomo

22. Again I can give a detailed report and evidence of Judge Kgomo court case should this Court require it, which would prove the deficiencies in the South African Judicial processes which are inconsistent with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights

  1. However I will give a brief overview below of how the Judge ignored all international law and relationships between legal entities during the course of the 2014 trial
  2. At page 299 of court transcriptions, Judge Kgomo instructions to Ian”KGOMO J: No, we are not in Jersey, sir, we are in South Africa. — You will remember we are in South Africa, that is why you are here. You haven’t litigated in Jersey; you are litigating in this country sir. Let’s keep to our South Africa law, forget about International law. The laws of Jersey belong to Jersey and I have no jurisdiction over what they do there. I have jurisdiction over what happens here, and you must subject yourself to the jurisdiction of the laws of this country. So forget of about the lofty ideas of some lofty court in some island paradise. “
  3. Then at page 371
    “KGOMO J: Forget about that, I told you yesterday you are in South Africa, what they do in the Isle of Man had got nothing to do with me in South Africa”
  4. Then at page 388
    “KGOMO J: Sir, we are not interested in the definitions of a trust orof a charge or what”
  5. Then at page 393″MR BRAKSPEAR: Well, there is two different legal entities, M’Lord. KGOMO J: Forget about the legal entities again, sir, is it not common cause that somebody who owed paid and then he in turn went to ask somebody he paid for to pay”
  6. I believe that it is important for this Court to view Judge Kgomo interview by members of the Judicial Committee in South Africa, for the position of Judge President at

The interview gives a good overview of his very controversial judgements and his lack of understanding in a wide range of issues.

Section 417 Hearing

  1. Mr Leonard Katz initiated the Section 417 hearing which was held between 10 -12 June 2009.
  2. At the Section 417 hearing, Mr Leonard Katz was the lawyer for both the Jersey trustee as creditor of the fictitious loan of £500,000 and the liquidators whose duty it was to examine the evidence that there was a loan of £500,000
  3. Not only was this a serious conflict of interest, but also Mr Leonard Katz was able to easily mislead the liquidators by way of his being their legal representative as well.
  4. At the section 417 hearing Mr Leonard Katz (as the creditors attorney) supposedly supplied the detailed evidence of loans, bank statements etc. to the liquidators (who as the liquidators attorney he advised them on legal issues of those fictitious debts) ofc) a fictitious £500,000 loan by Westley trust to West Dunes (Para 64 – 66 in Order of Justice) andd) a fictitious £340,000 loan from Westley Holdings (BVI) to West Dunes (Para 72 – 75 in Order of Justice).
  5. However more importantly the Jersey trustee affidavit (Roscouet first affidavit Para 34.1 and 34.2) and skeleton argument (Para 31(c)) proves conclusively that the £340,000 (ZAR 3,9 million) loan by Westley Holdings to West Dunes was fictitious and thus is irrefutable evidence that a fraud was committed on the beneficiaries of Westley trust and the genuine creditors of West Dunes.
  1. Given that Mr Leonard Katz played a pivotal role in the now undisputed and admitted £340,000 fraud I submit that Mr Leonard Katz affidavits should be read with this in mind.
  2. The Bankers Book Evidence also now proves that the statements made at the 417 Enquiry of which Mr Leonard Katz as the main legal representative and a big “influencer” in the way the proceedings were conducted, were false.
  3. Ian refused to be part of a corrupt liquidation and said he would rather go to jail to expose the rot in the liquidation industry than attend a corrupt Section 417 hearing, which has now been proved to be corrupt by the Bankers Book Evidence
  4. Strangely despite Mr Leonard Katz accusing Ian of a criminal act by not attending the Section 417, no charges were ever laid against Ian, which begs the question why?
  5. Notably there are 2 different Section 417 reports – containing different facts, which further goes to prove a corrupt process in the liquidation industry in South Africa.
  6. However due to time constraints I have not been able to get the second differing report from South Africa, but if it is relevant to this strike out and this court requires a copy I will get it.
  7. I do not know how many false representations by the Jersey Trustees and their legal representatives in South Africa, must be exposed by me to this Court, to have the strike out dismissed outright, but I will expose some more false representations to the South African Judiciary by Mr Leonard Katz.
  1. Evidence of the continued false misrepresentations by Mr Leonard Katz as the Jersey Trustee representative in the 417 Enquiry in June in 2009, is contained in a letter written by Mr Leonard Katz on the 14 December 2009, some 6 months later, to the Master of the Court (EXHIBIT 84)
  2. At Point 8 of the letter Mr Leonard Katz writes“Although the sum of £500,000 was paid directly by FPB [Jersey Bank] to FRB, this payment was pursuant to an agreement between the Westley Trust and FPB [Jersey Bank] in terms whereof FPB [Jersey Bank] advanced the sum of £500,000 to the Westley trust. This amount was in turn advanced to West Dunes by the payment therefore to FRB’
  3. The recently obtained Bankers Book Evidence contains no “agreement” between the Westley Trust and FPB (Jersey Bank) for £500,000
  4. The Bankers Book Evidence contains no evidence that the Jersey Bank “advanced the sum of £500,000 to Westley Trust”.
  5. The Bankers Book Evidence contains no evidence the Jersey bank paid £500,000 to any bank account in South Africa and no receipt from any recipient bank for a payment for £500,000.
  6. At 10.1 of the letter, Mr Leonard Katz submits unsigned and undated Westley trust financial statement. These accounts contain false financial information.
  7. At 10.4 Mr Leonard Katz provides an unsigned and undated “guarantee and indemnity” between Brakspear Trust and the Jersey Bank.
  1. The Bankers Book Evidence contains no “guarantee and indemnity” agreement and no reference to any “guarantee and indemnity” in any correspondence or formal demands relating to the Westley Trust.
  2. Nor does the unsigned and undated “guarantee and indemnity” give any legal right, power or authority to seize Brakspear Trust property and it does not contain any clause that passes either an absolute or a special property right in the Brakspear trust.
  3. Either Mr Katz is a party to supplying false agreements or someone within the Jersey trustee has supplied him with them.
  4. Given the false representations by Mr Leonard Katz and his propensity to deflect and mislead I will cover some other points from his third affidavit in brief below.
  5. I never said that Michael James was not an auctioneer, this is misdirection done on purpose
  6. I never said that Nedbank or ENS was part of the Auction alliance scandal, again misdirection done on purpose
  7. What I clearly said was that it was common practise to pay off attorneys and bankers with auctioneers commission as proven by the Auction Alliance scandal
  8. What I also said was that there was no auction and no proof of payment to the supposed “auctioneer”.
  9. The section 417, which is held “in camera” (i.e. not in public) did not prove that an auction took place.
  10. The “behind closed doors” hearings just goes to highlight one of the many methods used in the South African liquidation industry to cover up corruption and which are not compatible with human rights.
  1. Mr Leonard Katz 126-page affidavit provides no proof of payment of the auctioneer’s commission, which begs the question where did this “trust money” go?
  2. Applemint approached Ian and his lawyer personally in November 2008 to buy the farm. Mr Katz law firm ENS has acknowledged this in written correspondence in November 2008. So Mr Leonard Katz claim that Michael James introduced the farm to Applemint in December 2008 or January 2009 is completely false.
  3. It follows that Mr Katz allegations that Michael James Auctioneers “was due commission” is also false and the commission payment is tantamount to theft of the trust assets and a fraud on the beneficiaries and genuine creditors of West Dunes
  4. The fact that there are so many representations that are deceitful precludes any potential error hypothesis by Mr Leonard Katz or the Jersey Trustee.
  5. The only logical explanation is that the false representations are wilful, they are on purpose, they are by design and done with malice.
  6. I submit again, that this “strike out application” by a fiduciary with duties of absolute honesty and financial probity is itself an abuse of process and should not be allowed to continue or should be dismissed outright.
  7. Finally as to Mr Leonard Katz court cases in South Africa, I will, after the 24 April 2018 when this strike out trial is completed, be summonsing this Court to seek permission to use the Bankers Book Evidence in various matters in South Africa. These will include,a) As new evidence in the South Africa Court case,
    b) For evidence in a criminal investigation by the South African Police into corruption c) For evidence in the court case bought by Mr Leonard Katz against Noseweek magazine in which Mr Katz has alleged that Noseweek has published “fake facts” about this matter but which have now proved to be “true facts” by the Bankers Book Evidence

d) For evidence to various Law Society for complaints against certain lawyers.

Show More

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button
%d bloggers like this: