FORMER honorary diplomat to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Shamiso Fred has been dragged to court for allegedly defrauding Zimbabweans in the diaspora through a suspected Ponzi scheme.
The 300 diasporans who reportedly invested in a women organisation, African Business Women Association (ABWA) formed by Fred, are being represented by five other investors Blaman Sekete, Grace Pumhu, Vimbainashe Mahwiridi, Amanda Chakawa and Felix Witness Mambondiani.
In their application at the Zimbabwe Commercial Court, the five cited ABWA and Fred as respondents.
The applicants submitted that Fred and ABWA executed a contract called the Joint Venture Agreements (JVA) under which the investors were required to pay an agreed amount to fund various business projects running for up to 48 months.
In return, the investors would each be entitled to an agreed monthly profit share during the duration of the contract. It is, however, alleged that ABWA failed to pay out the monthly profits.
The investors prayed for a court ruling directing the respondents to reimburse them their monies.
Keep Reading
- Graft allegations rock top NGO
- COP27: UAE and Egypt agree to build one of world's biggest wind farms
- COP27: A glass half full
- Zim’s Rugby Ref of the Year Pazani reflects on “amazing” year
In an affidavit filed by Sekete, they alleged that ABWA has failed, refused and neglected to settle the amounts due to the investors.
“In the event that the JVAs are found unenforceable, recompense on the basis of unjust enrichment is sought in the alternative. The court is reminded that what is sought at this stage is not proof on a balance of probabilities but a prima facie case. That requirement is well met,” Sekete submitted in his affidavit.
Sekete said several investors were duped by Fred.
“However, all of them are no different in that ABWA has failed to perform its part of the bargain as aforesaid. It is convenient to pursue ABWA in concert by way of a class action,” he submitted.
The applicants submitted that they are seeking nothing else but the money they invested in ABWA.
"We do not seek a hidden benefit at the expense of the investors. What we seek is typical of the claims of the class in question. Our claim, just like the claims of the class, arise from the same course of events and each member of the class brings similar legal arguments to prove ABWA’s liability,” they said.