But I merely wish to have a view upon the status of the said Agreement
There are, effectively, three parties: A USA based creditor and a USA based debtor, with the UK party [brother of debtor] guarantor. The UK party as alleged "executor & trustee" of the estate of their late mother in Malta. Subsequently, The USA debtor and UK "guarantor", with their Malta solicitor swore affidavits to the effect that no such "estate & trust" existed and therefore the "guarantor" was not an "executor & trustee" - a status to which he had given his signature in the Notarised agreement..
The USA debtor also signed a codicil to the original agreement, but in the same terms as to the existence of "estate & trust", whereby the said debtor admitted to the debt with a status applicable to wherever he, the debtor, was residing - e.g., Mallta or Uk.
The essential is: were the debtor participants to the Notarised agreement guilty of fraud, having signed a document knowing the basis of the same to be false.
Recovery of the debt is not an issue for consideration.
May we start again and my apologies.
Hi, No problem.
Six beneficiaries under the will of their late mother - assets in Malta. One a debtor in the USA, sought to deter his creditor from foreclosing on his USA business. To achieve that, he alleged his Malta assets were held in trust [as you and I might understand the same] and that his younger brother was the "Executor & Trustee" of the said "Estate & Trust". Because of the standing of the younger brother, based in England, the creditor was satisfied that the matter would be dealt with correctly. An agreement was drafted and signed in the USA by the Debtor and signed in England by the younger brother - witnessed by their sister, also a beneficiary. The younger brother then made a payment under the said agreement, but refused to make further payments and ultimately denying the said agreement. Subsequently, on a different aspect, the debtor, the younger brother and the Malta family lawyer filed affidavits and witness statements to the effect that no such "estate & trust" existed and, therefore, the younger brother could be neither a "trustee" or "executor" of a non-existent "estate & trust" and, in consequence, having no obligation to clear his brothers debt to that particular creditor. The younger brother claimed to not having realised to that which he had signed. The younger brother is a person of stature and all the parties have had the benefit of excellent education. What redress has the USA creditor, per myself, in the UK concerning the apparently fraudulent agreement. The debtor has now skipped the USA leaving behind circa USD1M plus creditors. The debtor did sign a supplementary to the original agreement - whereby he acknowledges the debt liability would be valid inter alia in Malta. But the essential question is redress in the matter of the younger brother and the fraudulent agreement to to which he was a party. I have copies of the two agreements but have no knowledge how to transfer them to you. But the wordings and designations are as set-out above. Regards.
Thank you I will review this afternoon. Kind regards AJ