Hunting buddies in R2.2m court fight over Abu Dhabi royal project

Two close friends found themselves embroiled in a R2.2 million legal dispute over a project they were working on together for the Abu Dhabi Royal Family. The Western Cape High Court ruled against businessman Eduard Van Lamp and his company, Ten of Cups Events, requiring them to pay former friend Christopher Jackson the requested amount, plus additional costs.

Van Lamp and Jackson, who had been in each other's company since 2013, collaborated on multiple ventures and shared a deep bond, often hunting together. However, their friendship was shattered after Van Lamp brought Jackson into a project focused on a hunting excursion for the Abu Dhabi Royal Family at the eZulu Game Reserve. The project expanded to include tents, bedding, furniture, and top-tier catering services, with a project management fee constituting 10% of the total budget.

Following the presentation of the final plans and budget to the client in September 2022, the pair embarked on a preplanned hunting trip to Prieska, Northern Cape. It was during this journey that they allegedly agreed to split the project management fee 50/50, estimating it at over R11.4 million at the time. Due to various discounts from service providers that underperformed, the final project management fee amounted to approximately R9.65 million.

Jackson received R2.6 million, leaving him to seek the remaining R2.225 million through legal means. Van Lamp adamantly denied agreeing to an equal fee split, claiming Jackson had quoted R160,000 per month to manage the project. However, the court dismissed this claim as "demonstrably false," stating that the R160,000 monthly figure was implausible and illogical.

The judge also rejected Van Lamp's assertion that they never agreed on how Jackson should be compensated, deeming it "inconceivable" that the businessman would undertake such a significant project without clarifying Jackson's remuneration and still allowing further payments to be due. The court found that Van Lamp's multiple explanations for Jackson's payment were inconsistent and contradictory, while Jackson's version remained consistent and detailed.

Consequently, the court dismissed Van Lamp's appeal and ordered him and his company, Ten of Cups Events, to pay the costs, including the balance owed to Jackson.