Tasmica Construction

Notices requesting detailed information about certain payments and company financials linked to Mr Carrim were served but have not yet been responded to by Mr Carrim.

“Those details were thereafter, well, incorporated into a Regulation 10.6 notice that was dated 8th May 2026, and that was served on Mr Carrim by the Sheriff on 12th May ... Some of these are fairly routine details ... And a supplementary notice dated 20th May was sent to Mr Carrim and his attorneys when there was no response to the earlier notice ... thus far, we have received no response to that either.”

The evidence leader, while reviewing Medicare bank statements on 10 March 2026, discovered two substantial payments from Tasmica Construction into Medicare 24 not mentioned by Mr Carrim.

“While I was looking for that purpose, I stumbled across the fact that there were two substantial payments from Tasmica Construction, another company of Mr Carrim, into Medicare 24, which he did not mention in his statement.”

Bank statements received from FNB include a list of all contras for the entire Medicare 24 account, comprising thousands of transactions, and no documents were withheld.

“What we receive from FNB when we get bank statements from FNB is a list of all the contras. So we have contras for the entire Medicare 24 account. Thousands and thousands of transactions. We do not search on that set of transactions for Tasmica Construction unless we have reason to search for Tasmica Construction. This morning I had reason to search for Tasmica Construction.”

There is a suggestion that the contras spreadsheet was withheld, but it was actually created and provided between 05:00 and 06:00 on the morning of 10 March 2026 and given to the other party within 15 minutes.

“They make the suggestion that we have had that document and withheld it from them. That is a very irresponsible suggestion. ... I searched for Tasmica Construction and identified the two entries that were provided to them this morning. I then copied those two entries into a separate spreadsheet this morning sometime between 05:00 and 06:00 and gave it to them. Nothing has been withheld from them. They received that spreadsheet within 15 minutes of its creation.”

The legal team requested an itemised list of exact documents intended to be relied on for questioning and confirmed no other documents outside that scope would be relied on; failure to provide such information might force a postponement application.

“We said we did not want to apply for a postponement, but if documents and information was going to be withheld, we would be forced to do so ... We confirm a itemised list of the exact documents upon which you intend to rely for the purpose of questioning our client ... Confirmation that no documents or information falling outside the scope of those identified documents will be relied upon ... That is the Friday bundle ... We were hardly required to consider or take instructions on Tasmica.”

The 'finger pointing' by the opposing party regarding Tasmica is habitual and without basis, as Tasmica was not mentioned in the December 10 Notice which was the primary notice to address relationships with entities.

“In relation to the issue of Tasmica, our learned friend in his finger pointing ... suggests that this should have been covered in the statement. ... You will not find any mention of Tasmica. So we were hardly required to consider or take instructions on Tasmica.”