Villa Group lawyer MasthoorHusny has said that even though Civil Court had decreed that Villa Group had failed to meet all the legal requirements to request for a temporary stay order, set under ruling number 21 in 2012 by Supreme Court, the Group meets all the required criteria and that the Group had not been given substantial time to file such a case.
He made the statement speaking in the appeal hearings held yesterday regarding the cases filed against two companies of Villa Group. Civil Court had ruled that a stay order cannot be issued against Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA) as requested by the Group. This decision had been appealed in the High Court.
Villa Group lawyer former Attorney General Abdullah Muizz stated that Civil Court had refused to grant the petition for a stay order against MIRA, without holding any hearings of the case. He added that the Court had rejected the precedents set by the Court in similar cases, in this instance.
Muizz stated that in the Constitution it is explicitly stated that in the event where any party feels that basic human rights are being encroached by a case, a trial has to be held. However, he said that no hearings were held in the two cases.
Lawyer Masthoor stated that this was stated in the ruling, with no mentions of the details.
Responding to Villa lawyers, MIRA lawyers stated that they agreed with the arguments proposed by the lawyers. MIRA lawyers added that the two parties had been consulted on the stay order and that the presiding judge can choose to either to hold or not to hold a hearing. The MIRA lawyers stated that the Court issuing a ruling without holding a hearing. Additionally, the lawyers said that the MIRA notice was not illegal.
However, MIRA lawyers once again failed to state the principles on the fine amount and the clause under which the agreement was nullified.