A PROMINENT businessman is locked in a legal battle with his former brother-in-law in a dispute over £172,000.
Mario Gizzi, co-owner of the country's largest independent restaurant chain, Di Maggio's, is suing ex-family member Richard Davis and his brother Gerard Davis over what he claims is an unpaid loan.
Richard Davis, who was married to Mr Gizzi's sister, says the money was an investment in his now-dissolved forestry business and claims Mr Gizzi changed his story to say it was a loan when the firm began to struggle.
The relationship between the pair, once close, has deteriorated over the past few years following the firm's administration in 2011, culminating in the court dispute.
Court papers reveal the extent of their fall-out, with Richard Davis, of Claremont Terrace, Glasgow, claiming he was forced to contact police after Mr Gizzi was "aggressive and abusive" towards him.
Documents setting out Mr Gizzi's position say: "Mr Gizzi made the loan to the [brothers] to assist them at a time when the company had financing issues.
"He agreed to assist them as individuals as Mr Davis was married to his sister."
Mr Gizzi claims he loaned the brothers a total of £210,000 - £100,00 in April 2008, £100,000 in October 2008 and a further £10,000 in November the same year. However, he accepts he has received some of this back, leaving £172,400 outstanding.
The restaurateur claims the deals were kept secret from his sister.
The documents state: "Mr Davis asked for all sums loaned to the [brothers] to be paid to Gerard Davis. This was done to conceal the loans from Mr Davis' wife - Mr Gizzi's sister. Mr Davis did not want his wife to be aware of the company's financial issues."
Mr Gizzi, of Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire, added that, as the dispute worsened, their relationship completely broke down and Richard Davis refused to communicate with him.
However, Richard Davis's response states he did so "following advice from the police not to respond to communications from Mr Gizzi after he had complained to the police about his aggressive and abusive behaviour towards him in March 2013".
The Davis brothers also both claim the sums were given to them as an investment in their company, Forest (Bio Products) Ltd, in exchange for shares at a later date.
Papers lodged at Glasgow Sheriff Court on their behalf state: "There were several discussions between the [brothers] as directors of the company and Mr Gizzi whereupon it was agreed between Mr Gizzi and the company he would invest directly in the company in order that the company would expand.
"At no time during the discussion prior to the making of said investments was it suggested any sums to be advanced by Mr Gizzi were personal loans to the defenders."
The documents also state no request for repayment was made "until the business started to decline" following a fire at its plant in March 2010.
Both parties agree the Davis brothers received a loan of £400,000 from Mr Gizzi in 2007, which was fully repaid. Mr Gizzi claims he was asked for a further £180,000 in early 2009 but refused. The brothers deny this.
A friend of Mr Gizzi's said: "There is a point of principle involved here for Mario. He is very confident the court will find in his favour and anyone who knows Mario will be aware claims by his brother-in-law of aggressive behaviour are just a smokescreen."
A lawyer for Richard Davis declined to comment while the case was continuing.
Mr Gizzi, who runs Di Maggio's with business partner and co-owner Tony Conetta, is also a part-owner of restaurant chains Amarone, Barolo Grill, and Cafe Andaluz. He also owns property development firms the Ruthven Lane Partnership and D&G London Ltd.
A full hearing on the dispute will be heard in November.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article