The investment company has insisted the two wrangles \u2013 which have seen it suffer losses in the English and Namibia courts \u2013 have not been fully resolved.<\/p>\n
Namibia-headquartered investment and financial services company Trustco Group Holdings has moved to clarify that its loan-related spat with Mauritius investment company Helios Oryx and its tax wrangle with the Namibia Revenue Agency (NamRA) are still subject to ongoing legal and regulatory processes, and that \u201cno inference should be drawn that either matter has been finally resolved, determined or quantified for purposes of final outcome\u201d.<\/p>\n
The Helios dispute<\/p>\n
In a statement last week (23 April), Trustco said the litigation involving Helios \u201cremains ongoing and has not been finally determined\u201d and is still \u201csubject to legal process and further adjudication\u201d. It added that certain proceedings, related processes and factual disputes remain before the courts, and that it will \u201cpursue and defend its rights in accordance with the applicable legal processes\u201d.<\/p>\n
The dispute centres on a 2016 facilities agreement between the parties, under which Helios advanced USD 15 million to Trustco on specified repayment terms. The written agreement was expressly governed by English law, with the courts of England having exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising out of or in connection with it.<\/p>\n
In 2020, Helios turned to the High Court of England and Wales for repayment of the monies disbursed under the agreement. In January 2021, Deputy Judge Sir Michael Burton entered summary judgment in favour of Helios, ordering Trustco to pay the Mauritian company approximately NAD 371 million (USD 22.3 million).<\/p>\n
Helios then moved to enforce the judgment with the High Court of Namibia. Among its arguments, Trustco contended that enforcement of the foreign judgment would be against public policy, and that declaring it enforceable would result in non-compliance with Namibia\u2019s Exchange Control regulations. It also argued that the summary judgment order was obtained by fraud because Helios failed to disclose to the English court that it did not have locus standi (place of standing) to institute the proceedings in England.<\/p>\n
However, in September 2025 Judge Schimming-Chase granted enforcement, ruling that the English judgment was final and met the criteria set for enforcement of a foreign judgment in Namibia. The judge highlighted that it was \u201cnot against public policy to pursue a judgment sounding in money on an unpaid and outstanding loan\u201d. The judge also concluded that the parties expressly submitted to the jurisdiction of the English courts. \u201cThe English court proceedings were procedurally and substantively fair. The respondent had the opportunity to appeal but failed to comply with the court-ordered conditions through its own dilatory conduct,\u201d the judge stated.<\/p>\n
Trustco has appealed the ruling.<\/p>\n
The NamRA wrangle<\/p>\n
In its statement last week, Trustco said the matter involving NamRA also remains ongoing. \u201cThe company continues to engage with NamRA in relation to the issues in dispute, including through legal and other formal processes where applicable. The matter remains subject to further engagement and\/or adjudication and accordingly has not reached final determination,\u201d it stated.<\/p>\n
In April last year, Trustco lost its case against NamRA at the High Court of Namibia. The company took NamRA to court over the demand for payment of outstanding tax debts of NAD 593 million (USD 35.7 million) and the appointment of the First National Bank of Namibia (FNB) as an agent by NamRA. The tax authority had also frozen the bank accounts of 42 entities linked to Trustco.<\/p>\n
Trustco turned to the court to review and set aside NamRA\u2019s decisions linked to the agency\u2019s efforts to collect the tax owed, arguing that such decisions were unfair and unreasonable under certain established legal principles. In particular, it asserted that sections of the Income Tax Act and the Value-Added Tax Act, which allow tax authorities to appoint agents to collect tax, were unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
However, the High Court emphasised that the country\u2019s Supreme Court had previously held that Namibia\u2019s taxation system is based on the principle of \u201cpay now argue later\u201d. As such, Trustco was not entitled to be heard before the tax authority had taken action to collect the tax due and payable. Trustco\u2019s further grounds relating to the right to access the court, the right to property and right to administrative justice in its constitutional challenge were also dismissed.\u00a0<\/p>\n