(1888PressRelease)
November 05, 2007 - SEGOES Liquidators lose unanimous decision in Supreme Court of Uruguay!
Ken Krys and his team of unscrupulous affiliates, RSM Cayman Islands was handed a severe blow in October, 2, 2007 when the Supreme Court of Uruguay after deliberating for almost two years ruled against the enforcement of Cayman Islands legal judgements citing a lack of basic rights and basic legal principles, such as a "right to a defense"!
As difficult as it is too believe, in the Cayman Islands, a trail and judgement can be obtained against another person without that person having a right to a defense. The Uruguay Supreme Court, ruled that a right to a defense is paramount and must exist without conditions.
The Supreme Court stated, "The principles on which (the Cayman Islands) these proceedings are grounded as well as the right of defense are part of the public order in Uruguay constituting a real "ius gentium". The right of defense establishes that the statements of each party should be produced before the judge and that the verification therof by the judge shall be effective and legal."
Further, the Supreme Court said, the "Judgement dated Decemeber 2, 2005 was decreed under a Summary Procedure wherein the burden of proof was inverted on the grounds of an assertion of the defendant based on a simple suspicion. Judgement was pronounced on the basis of inferences from the affidavits produced by the liquidators."
"It must be taken into account that in order to elucidate the matter subexamine the current law of the state of origin of the judgements should be applied, "lex Causae", as stated by the referred legal provision, which means that the factual assumptions whereto the rule is to be applicable should result sufficiently proved from the proceedings. This is not the case, upon the analysis of the judgements the recognition whereof is sought, neither the issue nor rules applicable are explicit. The Plaintiffs statements are not sufficient who only asserted what should have been proved. Such assertions are not sufficiently supported by the evidence produced in the proceedings."
Therefore as explained by the Supreme Court of Uruguay, the burden of proof in The Cayman Islands does not exist for the accuser or Plaintiff, (Ken Krys and the SEGOES Liquidators) only for the defendant. Furthermore, a simple right to a defense in Cayman does not exist and was not provided to anyone that the SEGOES liquidators have sued!!!
"The High Court of Justice by unanimous decision of its members, sharing the opinion of the participating Deputy Court Attorney and Court Attorney in Charge, respectively shall dismiss the petition on the grounds that the requirements set forth by C.G.P. Article 539 for the enforcement of foreign judgements in our country have not been complied with."
Qualifications or observations made of the procedures carried out in the Cayman Islands are not intended to judge the correctness or convenience therof. However, when the enforcement of a foreign judgement is sought, the receiving State, without going to the merit of the case, is entitled to analyze whether certain basic procedural principles, which are an integral part of its own legal structure, have been complied with.
The clear infringements to the due process of law herein referred to prevent the court from accepting the application filed for the enforcement of the judgements thus obtained, constituting violation of international public order within the scope and meaning herein before examined."
###
