Rédaction Africa Links 24 with CP
Published on 2024-04-17 14:24:06
In our article of April 8th, we focused on the efforts made by the Provisional Administrator of the company MWANT JET Sarl and the Partner Michael YAV, aimed at relaunching the activities of said company. We noted that for the Provisional Administrator and Partner Michael YAV, Mwant Jet was going to resume its activities at all costs unless there was a dark hand preventing this resumption.
Your editorial team has obtained a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal of Kinshasa/Matete, which seems to be a setback to the efforts to revive the activities of the company MWANT JET Sarl.
Indeed, by its judgment rendered on April 3, 2024, under RCEA 264, the Court of Appeal of Kinshasa/Matete decided not to renew the mandate of the Provisional Administrator, Mr. Jean-Pierre Pfingu, at the head of the aviation company Mwant Jet. However, by its judgment rendered on February 21, 2024, under RCE 2175, the Commercial Court of Kinshasa/Matete had extended it for an additional six months.
The Appellate Judge considered that the mandate of the provisional administrator could not be renewed due to a lack of quality. He indicated that his mandate had already expired since the appointment decision as Provisional Administrator had been served on him on July 21, 2023, and by January 21, 2024, he had completed his 6-month mandate.
It emerges from the Court’s reasoning that the handover between Mr. Pfingu and his predecessor took place on August 3, 2023. How can it be admitted in this case that his mandate started on July 21, 2023? How could his mandate start from the service of the decision when he did not yet have effective control of the Company? Questions that apparently escaped the Appellate Judge.
Why did the first judge (Commercial Court) extend the mandate of the Provisional Administrator?
The judge of the first instance based his decision on the various efforts made by the Provisional Administrator, aimed at putting the Company back on track for the resumption of its activities. This, despite the enormous difficulties encountered in the fulfillment of his missions and taking into account the measures he planned to put in place. He therefore decided to extend the mandate of the Provisional Administrator.
In fact, why is it necessary to have a Provisional Administrator in charge of Mwant Jet?
Since January 2022, disputes have arisen between Gueda Yav Amani, the former Manager and partner holding 60% of the share capital, and Michael Yav Tshikung, the Financial Director and partner holding 40% of the share capital.
At the heart of this conflict is Michael Yav Tshikung’s insistence on auditing the company’s accounts since its inception and implementing management procedures manuals, concerning in particular the company’s financial inflows and outflows. This insistence cost him his dismissal from his position as Financial Director.
It should be noted that during Gueda Yav’s three-year term as manager of MWANT JET Sarl, she did not convene any Ordinary General Meeting, which is the only competent body to approve the company’s financial statements.
To safeguard the company’s interests, the Commercial Court of Kinshasa Matete, by its judgment RCE 1947 rendered on February 21, 2022, at the request of Michael YAV TSHIKUNG, decided to place Mwant Jet under provisional administration.
Sources close to the case reveal that “Gueda Yav has constantly put obstacles in the way to avoid the audit of the company’s accounts during the period of her management.”
In fact, it is important to know how she managed the company? What was the company’s financial situation from its inception until its dispossessio…
Read the original article(French) on Congo-Profond
