GOLD COAST ADVISORS COMPANY LIMITED vs MIKE EGHAN & ORS

The 3rd Defendant Applicant (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) has filed a Motion for the Admission of relevant documents which relate to the issues set down for preliminary legal argument into evidence.

I have read through the Motion Paper, Affidavit in Support, the Supplementary Affidavit in support with attached Exhibits as well as the Affidavit in Opposition.

Careful consideration has been given to the written submissions of Counsels for both the Applicant and the Plaintiff Respondent (hereinafter referred to as Respondent).

From the affidavit in support of the instant application, the facts giving rise to the instant application is that during Pretrial Review Conference, the Pretrial Judge set down for preliminary legal argument the following issues proposed by Applicant:

a) Whether or not the pleadings of the Plaintiff establish a cause of action against the 3rd Defendant.

b) Whether or not the 3rd Defendant which is not Party to the Agreement(s) and transaction(s) between the Plaintiff and the 1st and 2nd Defendants relating to the 1st and 2nd Defendants’ shares in the 3rd Defendant Company is bound by such Agreement(s) and/or transactions reached between the parties thereto.

c) Whether or not the Plaintiff has been approved or registered as a Shareholder of the 3rd Defendant Company.

d) Whether or not the Directors of the 3rd Defendant Company have absolute discretion under the company’s regulations as to whether to accept the Plaintiff as Shareholder.

e) Whether or not without the prior approval of the NIC required by Section 48 of the Insurance Act, 2006 (Act 724) to the purported acquisition of the 1st and 2nd Defendants’ 40% shares in the 3rd Defendant company by the Plaintiff, the purported sale of the 1st and 2nd Defendants’ 40% shares in the 3rd Defendant can be lawfully recognized by the 3rd Defendant.

f) Whether or not, on the state of the pleadings, the claim by the Plaintiff to be recognized or registered as a shareholder of the 3rd Defendant Company pursuant to a sale and purchase transaction purportedly concluded in 2014, is barred by Section 1 (b) of the Limitation Act, 1972 (NRCD 54), not having been made within Six (6) years before the commencement of this action.

g) Whether or not, on the state of the pleadings, the claim by the Plaintiff to a refund of monies allegedly paid to the 3rd Defendant is barred by Section 1(b) of the Limitation Act, 1972 (NRCD 54), not having been made within Six (6) years from the date the