Austrian national Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer was dealt yet another legal blow when a high court in The Gambia dismissed his legal action against Ebrima Solomon Tamba, Marcel Lambertus Teunis van Andel and Kasumai Real Estate.
It could be recalled that Mr. Stofleth lost another another legal argument last month when the Banjul Magistrates’ Court ruled that he must stand trial against the inspector general of police for refusing police investigators access to his laptop, containing details about his cryptocurrency activities.
Manuel, through his attorneys Ida Drammeh and Sheriff Tambedou, filed a motion on 14 August 2025, seeking an interlocutory injunction to restrain Tamba and Andel by themselves, their servants or agents howsoever from stopping, interfering in any way, with the business of the company, and/or in its management by Manuel, in particular, the ongoing construction of the 18-storey Bitcoin Tower, pending such further or other orders the court might deem fit.
Manuel also sought from the high court an interlocutory injunction to restrain howsoever from stopping, interfering in any way with the management by him of the 27 apartment complex in Bijilo known as the Edge until such further or other orders the court might deem fit. The Austrian also sought an injunction for him to manage the day-to-day business of the company “for the benefit of the company, pending such further or other orders the court might deem fit.
Counsels Drammeh and Tambedou argued in their submission that the application was brought pursuant to the Company’s Act 2013, particularly section 301. According to the counsels, the court is empowered to make interim orders. They further submitted that the application was brought under the rules of court and Order 12, Second Schedule of the Rules of the High Court and Order Six, Rule II of the First Schedule.
However following legal arguments between the legal representatives, the court ruled that Manuel cannot purport to commence the suit without satisfying the condition set in a relevant section of the law. The court also ruled that Manuel has failed to comply with the Company’s Act (2013).
“Having failed to satisfy the court that the action is brought in compliance with Section 298 (2) of the Companies Act,2013, the entire suit fails and is null and void,” Justice Kwabeng, presiding, ruled on Thursday. “It does not properly invoke the jurisdiction of the court. To be clear, the whole suit falls apart for want of compliance with the statutory conditions, precedent to the commencement of the instant action.”
The court also ruled that it was convinced from the submission of Andel and Tamba’s lawyer Kebba Sanyang that the legal action against his clients was brought in bad faith in view of the depositions in the affidavit in opposition.
