Yesterday the matter involving Royal Investment (Guyana Stores) and National Industrial and Commercial Investment Limited (NICIL) was called again in the High Court before Justice Roxanne George-Wiltshire.During the hearing more startling discoveries were made and shown to head of NICIL Winston Brassington who was again called to the witness stand where he was crossed examined by Senior Counsel Rex Mc Kay.Royal Investment Inc. is headed by proprietor Tony Yassin. NICIL is being represented by Rafiq Turhan Khan, while Yassin is being represented by Senior Counsel Rex Mc Kay,Cheap Jerseys Online, Edward Luckhoo and Mr. Sasenarine.Royal Investment Inc. has been sued by the Privatisation Unit/ NICIL for failing to pay the balance of US$2 million for the 70 million shares in Guyana Stores which the company acquired for US$6million.As Mr. Mc Kay continued his cross-examination of Mr. Brassington,Cheap Jerseys Wholesale, he asked Brassington if he recalled stating to the buyer that there would be no encumbrance of the assets. To this Mr. Brassington answered in the negative.“I take it that you understand the meaning of encumbrance,” Mr. Mc Kay enquired.Mr. Brassington told the court that he is well aware of the meaning. He stated that NICIL would not encumber the fixed assets of the Company,Discount Football Jerseys, GSL. Mr. Mc Kay then enquired from Brassington if he recalled a loan being taken from the Republic Bank to pay a dividend and Mr. Brassington replied in the positive.The Senior Counsel also asked Brassington if he had since looked at the section of the Companies’ Act,China NFL Jerseys, Section 50, which dealt with the payment of a dividend. The NICIL head responded that he had no time to look at it.“Would you take it that according to Section 50 of the Companies’ Act,Jerseys From China, that dividends can only be paid out of profits?” Mr. Mc Kay asked NICIL head.? Brassington responded in the affirmative.It was also put to Mr. Brassington that he attempted to switch a property which was being held as security.Mr. Mc Kay then asked Mr. Brassington if he recalled writing a letter dated May 8, 2000 addressed to Mr. Raymond Changlee from a commercial bank. To this Mr. Brassington said that he has no reason to doubt that he did. The letter was tendered as evidence as it was pointed out to the court that the letter was asking Mr. Changlee to remove the building at 13-15 Water Street as being part of the Guyana Stores sales package.Brassington said that the building at 13-15 Water Street – the Garage Building – was owned by Property Holdings Inc.Mr. Mc Kay further put to Mr. Brassington that the building was used as security at the Bank for the loan. Mr. Changlee was asked to take it off and to substitute same with Building at 19, Water Street, Georgetown.A letter dated May 25, 2000 (NICIL #18) written Mr. Changlee as response, was shown to Mr. Brassington.Referring to that letter, Mr. Mc Kay noted out that Mr. Changlee after very careful consideration,cheap jerseys, refused the request. Mr. Brassington said that he had no doubt that he received that letter.The matter will be called again on September 14.