Louis Liebenberg's bail application faces further delays as lawyer withdraws over unpaid fees
Image: Zelda Venter
There is yet another delay in the start of the bail application of diamond dealer Louis Liebenberg - this time after his lawyer withdrew from the case as he is apparently still waiting to be paid.
Liebenberg and his co-accused appeared again in the Bronkhorstspruit Magistrate's Court on Tuesday, where his lawyer, Jaco du Plessis, indicated that while he is withdrawing at this stage, he may return if the financial arrangement can be sorted out.
Du Plessis also indicated that he is having problems consulting with Liebenberg, who is held at C-Max Prison in Pretoria.
Liebenberg, meanwhile, indicated to the court that he is trying his best to prepare in jail for his bail application.
He launched a successful application to be able to access documents on his cellphone, which he aims to use for his bail application.
He also indicated that he plans on calling about 55 witnesses in a bid to prove that the State has a weak case against him.
It is not certain at this stage whether he will handle his bail application or whether Du Plessis will assist him.
Liebenberg complained that while incarcerated in C-Max Prison, he had difficulty consulting with his lawyer.
He further complained that circumstances in the maximum prison also made it nearly impossible for him to speak to his wife, Dezzi Liebenberg.
She is also awaiting trial in jail after the lower court earlier denied her bail, and the high court subsequently turned down her appeal against the bail refusal.
Liebenberg's bail application is, meanwhile, to proceed from August 7, over three days.
During Dezzi's bail application earlier, the State argued that the couple had attempted to hide more than R200 million from the authorities following a video depicting Liebenberg boasting about his fortunes online.
They are facing about 42 charges, including fraud, theft, racketeering, and money laundering.
The State alleges that Liebenberg operated a diamond syndicate that was involved in dealing with and luring unsuspecting investors to invest in unpolished diamonds through social media platforms. As such, he has been accused of fleecing his investors of more than R4 billion since 2019.
Liebenberg and his wife were arrested at a Gauteng restaurant on the night of October 22 last year after a five-year probe.
The couple stands accused along with their co-accused: Magdelena Petronella Kleynhans, Johannes Petrus Badenhorst, Helena Dorothea Amy Schulenburg, Adriaan Dewald Strydom, Christelle Badenhorst, Nicolize van Heerden, and Walter Niendinger.
[email protected]
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
13 minutes ago
- IOL News
LEAVE TO APPEAL BLOCKED
The Western Cape High Court has dismissed the application for leave to appeal brought by all three people in the case of the missing Joshlin Smith. Joshlin's mother, Kelly Smith, her boyfriend, Jacquen 'Boeta' Appollis, and Steveno van Rhyn were sentenced on 29 May, and are currently serving life plus 10 years for trafficking in persons and kidnapping. Judge Nathan Erasmus said that a sentence of life imprisonment, especially in human trafficking of a child, even when a person has shown no remorse, is inappropriate to impose a lighter sentence or allow an appeal on the sentence. In his ruling on Wednesday, he said: "Turning to the merits and the attack on that, this court made factual findings and drew inferences from circumstantial evidence, and had the benefit of observing witnesses on which I made credibility findings. "Consequently, the application for leave to appeal, insofar as Mr Appollis on the conviction is refused. Insofar as it relates to Mr Van Rhyn and Ms Smith, it is similarly refused." Earlier, Erasmus granted indemnity to Section 204 witness Lourentia Lombaard. Lombaard was the State's star witness in the trial over the disappearance of the green-eyed girl from Middelpos, Saldanha.
The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
PIC stuffs more funds into Daybreak Foods, after chicken catastrophe
NSPCA and business rescue professionals are working together to achieve what those responsible – and being paid – failed to do. It took a public outcry and the killing of thousands of starving chickens to get people to act against years of poor management at Daybreak Foods, the large poultry producer owned by the Public Investment Corporation (PIC). Complaints to the National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA) about starving chickens eating each other alive finally prompted intervention in April. The NSPCA said in a statement that it has laid criminal charges against the then directors of Daybreak Foods following the 'large-scale animal welfare disaster that has captured global attention'. 'In this catastrophic failure, that has sent shock waves throughout the world, more than one million birds were subjected to extreme neglect, resulting in widespread suffering and death. 'Following extensive on-site investigations, the NSPCA uncovered overwhelming evidence of gross negligence, systemic mismanagement, and a complete abdication of responsibility by Daybreak's leadership. These failures were not only inhumane but criminal in nature, prompting the NSPCA to take legal action. 'We will now work closely with the South African Police Service and the National Prosecuting Authority to pursue justice on behalf of the animals that suffered,' says the NSPCA. ALSO READ: Business rescue for stricken chicken producer Daybreak Foods Business rescue Since the recent problems came to light in May 2025, the PIC has appointed a new board of directors and pledged more than R200 million in additional funding. It said that it was 'deeply disturbed' by reports of culling and cannibalism among the poultry stock at Daybreak Foods' farming operations. Despite being the sole owner of Daybreak Foods, the PIC quickly distanced itself from responsibility. 'The board and management of Daybreak are responsible and accountable for the operations and finances of the company,' it said, adding that it would nevertheless continue to support Daybreak and has provided capital allocations to ensure the company's liquidity. Daybreak Foods was placed into business rescue on 20 May. The PIC has expressed its support for the business rescue process. 'The PIC is of the firm belief that the company can be rescued – and must – be rescued, and that business rescue is the best path to preserve the company's value and potential, saving approximately 3 000 jobs, and importantly, realise returns for clients and their beneficiaries on their investment. 'The PIC has already undertaken several measures to contribute towards stabilising Daybreak Foods, which includes the injection of R74 million in working capital, that is intended to address the company's immediate liquidity needs,' it said. Tebogo Maoto, senior business rescue practitioner (BRP) for Daybreak Foods, said in response to questions that the BRP welcomes the PIC's funding support, which will provide the much-needed liquidity to implement the emergency phase of company's business rescue proceedings. 'The PIC funding will be utilised for making payments for critical operational costs, including salaries whilst the business rescue plan is being developed (to be published on 22 August 2025). 'The BRP will continue to engage with the funders and shareholder to address the additional liquidity support needed for the emergency phase of the business rescue process, and to seek a strategic equity partner. 'The BRP has taken full management control of the company and is working closely with current management in the interest of all stakeholders. The PIC, as a shareholder and lender, is not involved in the company's operations. 'The BRP engages the PIC on a regular basis, providing updates on the status of the company's business rescue proceedings,' says Maoto. He says that only the hatchery and breeder operations are currently being run at Daybreak Foods, and that the proposed business rescue plan will deal with the manner in which the company's other operations will be reactivated in order for it to reach break-even and turn a profit. 'The BRP cannot comment on the PIC's future plans, save to state that it remains committed to rescuing the company,' says Maoto. ALSO READ: SPCA lays charges against Daybreak Farms' bosses NSPCA The NSPCA said it is currently closely involved with many aspects of Daybreak's chicken farms and continues to monitor the situation carefully. 'The NSPCA remains actively involved. We receive weekly reports from Daybreak Foods, which include delivery notes for feed, mortality figures, and other key welfare indicators. We verify this information through physical inspections. 'We conduct on-site inspections, with additional assistance from the local SPCAs with jurisdiction over the relevant sites, to assist with ongoing oversight. 'At present, there are no immediate welfare concerns. Operations have scaled down significantly, with only the two breeder sites in Limpopo still active. While rearing has not resumed, the limited scope of operations makes oversight more manageable at this stage,' according to a spokesman for the NSPCA. Asked if the NSPCA has insight into the purchase of food for the chickens, he says that the weekly reports provide oversight. 'However, we are aware that Daybreak is currently under significant financial strain and has a long list of creditors. While feed has been provided consistently thus far, we are unable to confirm how long this can be sustained.' Daybreak Foods currently keeps approximately 220 000 breeder birds in two farms in Limpopo, but has submitted a formal request to the NSPCA to resume breeder operations by introducing additional breeder stock. 'We are scheduled to meet with them to discuss this proposal and assess the potential welfare implications,' he added. That the NSPCA should agree to a private company expanding operation is, in this case, necessary – the pictures of neglected chickens prove this. ALSO READ: Chicken farm funded by PIC fails to reverse court order against inhumane practices Corporate spin This reality is far removed from the corporate image portrayed by Daybreak Foods. Its website speaks of 'dedication and a commitment to excellence' and describes Daybreak Foods as a prominent player in the poultry industry. 'Our journey has been marked by continuous innovation, sustainability efforts, and a focus on delivering the best to our customers. Today, Daybreak Foods stands as a testament to hard work, resilience, and a relentless pursuit of quality, proudly serving communities with products they can trust. Daybreak Foods is currently a level 8 B-BBEE contributor, and we strive to improve our score through a range of initiatives. 'Daybreak Foods is one of the largest integrated poultry producers in SA. Our core purpose is to maintain a unique position that allows us to reshape how we remain part of 'The Great South African Family' while growing the business portfolio. As we continue to grow, we are embracing our responsibility to drive positive change, solve problems, and make society a little better every day. 'Our values directly link the business activities to our responsibilities towards our stakeholders – including shareholders, management, employees, customers, the environment, society and government,' it says. In reality, it couldn't pay salaries or the monthly fee to access e-mails and related information technology services. Hopefully, the new directors appointed by the PIC will set things right. They seem to have the right credentials, including five agricultural and veterinary specialists – many with secondary business degrees – as well as two accountants from the PIC. The question remains: What is wrong in SA that things must fall apart and become a public embarrassment before efforts are made to fix it? Wouldn't it be easier to get things right the first time? This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Gauteng man in a legal battle with BMW Financial Services as he's forced to pay over R1. 6 million for uncollected car
Farhaad Mahomed was concerned that the new car he purchased might have been test-driven by potential buyers after seeing it displayed in the dealership's showroom. A Gauteng business man is in a financial nightmare as BMW Financial Services have taken him to court to demand R1.6 million over a luxury vehicle he never collected. The turmoil began in late 2019 when Farhaad Mahomed, riding high on the success of his business, made a significant investment into a brand-new BMW X3M Competition destined to enhance his fleet. The 50-year-old from Lenasia in Johannesburg, bought the brand new car in November 2019 from SMG BMW Century City in Cape Town. To secure the car, he stated that the dealership required him to sign an undated finance contract even though the vehicle was still at the port of Durban. Before the deal was completed, Mahomed said he paid a hefty R200,000 deposit and BMW Financial Services financed the balance of over R1 million. Mahomed arranged for the vehicle to be delivered to his local BMW dealership, planning to pick it up in January 2020 so that it could be registered as a 2020 model. Little did he know, this decision would plunge him into a legal nightmare. "If I had fetched it immediately in December, it would have been registered as a 2019 model and I would have driven it for just 30 days, for me it didn't make sense. So we agreed that I'll be fetching the car on January 2, 2020," he said. As he was still waiting to collect the car, he noticed the car was advertised on various social media platforms after it was displayed in the dealership's showroom. He grew concerned that prospective clients might be test-driving it and asked for the advertisement to be taken down, but his request was not fulfilled. "I was not happy because this means anyone who came to the dealership had access to the car and would have potentially test driven it if they were interested in it. This means the car was no longer new but a demo car and I was not going to accept it." He provided IOL with an email sent to BMW, detailing his concern about the car being displayed in the showroom. In response, the sales manager explained that the car was in the showroom due to the basement parking being full. The manager also stated that it was improbable for Mahomed to be the vehicle's first driver, as new vehicles are typically driven multiple times before reaching their owners. "When the car is loaded onto a carrier at the plant, it is physically driven by a person. The same happens when the car is loaded onto a cargo vessel for the shipping of the car to South Africa. Once the vessel arrives in our harbor, another person physically drives the car off the vessel to be loaded onto a carrier that will transport the car to Midrand," read the reply. Still not satisfied with the response, Mahomed said he requested the footage to prove the car had not been driven while at the dealership, but he was informed that there were no cameras in the showroom and others were not working. "That's when I knew they were playing me, they couldn't even provide me with proof that the car remained stationery from the day they got delivery," he said.
