Mr Tekkie refutes Pepkor’s false statement
CAPE TOWN – Mr Tekkie and its founders regret to yet again have to issue a press release that addresses false claims by Pepkor.
The Steinhoff controlled company claims that they have delivered a list of Tekkie Town footwear that Mr Tekkie is prohibited from stocking.
This is not true.
“The list received by our legal team this morning is overly broad and opportunistic. It is not the Annexure A that is referred to in the court order as there has never been one, and in any event, its contents are in stark contrast to Judge Baartman’s ruling,” said Bernard Mostert, who along with Braam van Huyssteen and four others are respondents in the case.
In her ruling Judge Baartman stated: “The effective date is 1 October 2016. I have considered that prior to that date, the respondents have employed entrepreneurial skill, talent and have achieved much success. They provide much needed employment. They should not be hampered in their economic activity beyond the effective date.
“Critically, the list received today was never produced before Judge Baartman, nor were the respondents handed the list prior to Judge Baartman's ruling being handed down for reply, as Judge Baartman had required Pepkor to do.
“The contents of the list have not been verified at all and in the state provided, are impossible to verify as the list refers to Tekkie Town’s internal classifications only and contains no industry standard definitions whatsoever. At this stage it is impossible to determine whether any items on the list – if any at all – could be subject to the terms of the order, which specifically refers to the date of 1 October 2016.”
When asked by Judge Baartman to produce a list during the court proceedings Pepkor failed to do so. Its counsel claimed during the proceedings that the list was so exhaustive and detailed that it ran over 500 pages with thousands of style codes. “The list Pepkor unilaterally produced today contains no style codes at all and if this was indeed what they were asked to produce during the court proceedings, it should have taken them no more than 15 minutes.”
“On top of that it is critical to point out that Mr Tekkie is not a respondent to the case. This statement that Mr Tekkie is interdicted from stocking the footwear contained in the list is simply untrue and a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. This again exposes the culture of misrepresentation and obfuscation that defines the Steinhoff scandal and those embedded in its carcass.
“It is ironic that the individuals that drive this process for Pepkor are the same individuals who did not blink an eye to the use and reliance of more than R440 million of shareholders' resources, which were used to shield themselves personally from Steinhoff share losses, without disclosing that detail to the market or its shareholders at the time of doing so.”
Mr Tekkie regrets that Pepkor has attempted to publicly abuse a court order and the processes that underpin South Africa’s storied legal system. The owners of Mr. Tekkie – which includes 115 South Africans from all walks of life – are grateful that they have the protection of the legal system in which to respond to this type of questionable behaviour.
Content supplied by Mr Tekkie founders.
BUSINESS REPORT ONLINE