Orthotouch claims SCA did not allow for legal argument

Property group withdraws appeals.
Property magnate Nic Georgiou. Picture: Supplied

Property group Orthotouch has criticised the developments in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), which saw the group withdraw its appeals and tendering punitive legal costs to the Highveld Syndication Action Group (HSAG).

Orthotouch claims its legal counsel wasn’t given an opportunity to argue its case in full and that the appeals were withdrawn to avoid references of impropriety that may have been made in a judgment.

The appeals were against two scathing High Court judgments involving Orthotouch and its owner, property magnate Nic Georgiou. The courts found Georgiou acted unethically and abused the legal system when he secretly settled the claims of the six applicants who represented around 7 000 HSAG members in the applications to have the Section 155 Scheme of Arrangement set aside and for the certification of the class action. After settling the claims, the six withdrew their applications and changed lawyers without informing the HSAG’s lawyers. If allowed, it would have scuttled the applications.
Press statement

In a press statement, Orthotouch says it is “disappointed that the SCA did not allow its full legal argument to be heard… and believes that had the Orthotouch counsel been given the opportunity to argue the appeals, the court would have been in a position to give clarity on the rights and obligations of the representative plaintiffs in applications to certify class actions”.

The statement, which largely addresses inaccurate media reports, went on to state that the appeals were withdrawn by Orthotouch and Georgiou’s “legal teams to avoid any inference of impropriety being drawn and costs were tendered. There was furthermore no concession that Georgiou acted unethically and abused the legal system”.

Moneyweb did not attend the hearing, but has confirmed from several sources that the full bench of judges was highly critical of Orthotouch and Georgiou’s conduct during their counsel’s legal argument.

Read the full statement here.
SCA response

Moneyweb put Orthotouch’s claims of not being allowed to present their full legal argument to the court to the chief registrar of the SCA, Mrs C van der Merwe. She officially responded as follows:

“The following is what, in fact, occurred. Proceedings took place in open court. During the course of argument by counsel on behalf of the appellants, they were afforded an opportunity to take instructions. After a fairly lengthy adjournment the court was informed that the appellants were withdrawing the appeals and tendered costs. The respondents were unwilling to accept costs other than on a punitive scale. At that stage the parties could not reach agreement on costs. Consequently, the court reserved judgment in relation to costs. Minutes thereafter, counsel on behalf of the appellants informed the court in chambers that they were now offering costs on a punitive scale.”
Read the SCA letter here.
HSAG response

The HSAG legal representative Jacques Theron of Theron and Associates, rejected Orthotouch’s version of events. “It is startling to even suggest that five judges of the SCA disallowed a party to present its arguments to the court. If this was the case, it should be a national scandal of historic proportions!”

He said that Orthotouch and Georgiou’s counsel set out their arguments in their Heads of Argument, which were filed at the court prior to the hearing. “The five judges simply made it clear that they were very unimpressed with any of those arguments.”

In response to Orthotouch’s assertion that the appeals were withdrawn to avoid any inference of impropriety being drawn, Theron said two high courts already found improprieties in Orthotouch and Georgiou’s conduct.

He added that the tendering of punitive costs “speaks volumes… any punitive costs order is given only if a party acted in a way that warrants the strongest disapproval or condemnation by the court”.

He added that the HSAG is of the view that Georgiou and Orthotouch, through their withdrawal, prevented the judges to give a scathing written judgment.

Late payment of interest

Derek Cohen, receiver of the scheme, also took action against Orthotouch regarding the late payment of interest to investors.

In a letter addressed to investors he states that the late payments are unacceptable.

“Late payments persist despite the latitude given to Orthotouch and Zephan in this regard. In recent months payment of monthly interest on the 7th of each month (per the arrangement) has become the exception rather than the rule. More recently, there has been a deterioration in the payment patterns.

“I find this position to be unacceptable and therefore my attorneys have been instructed to address a letter of demand to Orthotouch and Zephan placing them on terms and inter alia demanding that should future monthly interest payments not be paid by the 7th of each month I will be compelled to approach the courts.”
Read the full letter here.


Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in and an Insider Gold subscriber to comment.


When the judges are so ‘highly critical’ during legal arguments of Nic Georgious and his legal Counsel and impose punitive costs against Georgiou then you know how truly unethical, untrustworthy and manipulative this Nic Georgiou actually is.

Should there not be a penalty for the legal counsel that help their clients abuse the legal system??

When will Georgio realize that he or his empire are not above the law.They got away with murder but the wheel is turning slowly but surely Thank God for our law system that seemms to know their tactics by now.We are waiting intensely for the Pickvest/Ortotouch nightmare to go to court,which Georgio is desperately trying to derail,so that the truth can be obtained

Chief registrar of the SCA, Mrs C van der Merwe, thank you from the bottom of our hearts for putting the facts out there for everyone to take note. Ryk Neethling, the same to to you for once again reporting the facts. A HEARTFELT THANKS to Theron & Partners and our fantastic legal team. It’s now only a matter of time and a Certificate will be issued to HSAG to proceed with the Class Action against Georgiou and Co.

5 judges cant be wrong If you have enough money court cases can be dragged for years with poor investors dying and suffering Hopefully the end of this is near

Nic Georgio (Zephan) received R4.6b from the investors via Bosman Visser so how can he deny it? Elna Visagie was one of the so called detractors but is employed by Ortotouch now after she jumped the ship for an extrodinary salary How do you explain this???

She was not the only detractor. Initially they represented the investors but it seems Mr Georgio managed to pay them enough money to switch sides. I call them back stabbers.

Helgardt Hancke is another one. Helgardt’s wife inherited shares in Ortotouch and Helgardt was part of the investors who tried to help the stranded investors via Theron and Vennote. It seems he even had the name list of all the investors who was registered with Theron and Vennote clients.

It seems Mr Hancke settled with Mr Georgiou and then started HSBF – HSIF (HS Beleggers Forum / HS Investors Forum) in which he encouraged the same investors to turn against Theron and Vennote, who is trying to help the investors with class action. It seems Mr Hancke misused the information obtained from Theron and Vennote

Although Mr Hancke is no lawyer he managed to get some investors to settle and sign off their rights to their investments and those investors won’t have a legal leg to stand on if Mr Georgiou decide not to fulfill his part of the settlement (which is promised to be done over 5 years)

Thank you Ryk for great investigative reporting and getting the facts out to the Business Community – this debacle has been going on for far too long now!

After reading the press statement issued by Orthotouch, I had to laugh at the contradictions… although this entire ± 9 year debacle is NO laughing matter!

Another worm that has crawled out of the woodwork, is Mr Derek Pedoe Cohen.
He was appointed “Receiver” after the SoA155 replaced the BRP, late 2014/early 2015.
This is the first time Mr Cohen has issued a circular to Investors regarding late interest payments!

By Law, in terms of the Companies Act the “Receiver” has an administrative and legal obligation to report to the HS Investors on all assets, liabilities, income and expenses: supply Annual Reports, hold Annual Meetings and release Annual Financial Statements.

Mr Derek P Cohen has not released any Orthotouch Annual Financial Statements to Investors that I know of, since 2015.

It is now 2018!

So many ??? surrounding this saga …

End of comments.



Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Moneyweb newsletters

Instrument Details  

You do not have any portfolios, please create one here.
You do not have an alert portfolio, please create one here.

Follow us: