Easy Go sues minister over $132k

Easy Go sues minister over $132k

Source: Easy Go sues minister over $132k – DailyNews Live

Tendai Kamhungira      8 June 2017

HARARE – The Central Mechanical Engineering Department (CMED)-owned Easy
Go has dragged Public Service minister Prisca Mupfumira to the High Court
for failing to pay $132 000 for motor vehicles hired from the State
transport firm.

Easy Go, which is represented by lawyers from TK Hove and Partners, cites
Mupfumira as the respondent in her official capacity.

According to court summons filed on May 18, the Public Service ministry
hired the motor vehicles between 2014 and 2015.

“Sometime in 2014 and 2015, plaintiff (Easy Go) and defendant (Public
Service ministry) entered into an agreement in terms of which plaintiff
hired out vehicles to the defendant.

“Plaintiff fulfilled its obligations in terms of the agreement by
providing the car hire services to the defendant,” the CMED subsidiary
told the court.

Easy Go claimed in its court papers that the Public Service ministry
failed to meet its side of the agreement, prompting the firm to approach
the High Court to seek remedy.

“Defendant breached the agreement by paying only part of the amount,
leaving a balance in the sum of $132 297,07,” Easy Go claimed in court
papers.

It further told the court that the amount is still outstanding and the
Public Service ministry is liable to pay the money.

“Sometime in March 2016, plaintiff through its lawyers of record wrote a
letter of demand to the defendant which was never complied with.

“Defendant has refused, failed and or neglected to pay the whole amount
despite demand. Defendant has no right at law to refuse to pay the whole
amount,” reads the court summons.

The firm is now demanding the outstanding amount together with interest at
the prescribed rate and collection commission fees.

The Public Service ministry has not yet fully responded to the application
but has since entered an appearance to defend.

The matter is still to be set down for hearing before the High Court.

COMMENTS

WORDPRESS: 0