After "a Rolls-Royce ride through the highways of the South African legal system", high-flying businesswoman Anne Pratt has lost her 13-year legal battle to wriggle out of paying back a R25-million loan from FirstRand Bank.The Gauteng entrepreneur borrowed the money in 2001 to invest in the Channel island of Jersey and take advantage of the rand/sterling exchange rate. But the plan backfired when the rand improved soon after she took the loan.Pratt, who is a senior partner at recruitment company Memela Pratt & Associates, then decided to withdraw her investments and make use of Reserve Bank amnesty for people who had contravened exchange control regulations.She went to court three times to have the loan declared null and void, citing contraventions by the bank.Her latest application to stop FirstRand from executing the judgment was denied last week.Judge Neil Tuchten was scathing in his comments about Pratt, who was runner-up in the entrepreneur category of the 2009 BWA Nedcor South Africa businesswoman of the year award.He said she had claimed that paying the money back would be "monetarily and emotionally devastating to her and to those whom she supports professionally and personally" but could not say what she had done with the money.Pratt launched her first application to have the loan declared void in September 2003, arguing that she had been advised by a FirstRand employee to conclude the transaction, and that it was concluded without permission from the National Treasury, among other things. Based on this, Pratt argued, the transaction was fraudulent.Her application was dismissed. She appealed in the Supreme Court of Appeal, but the ruling was upheld.Almost two years later, the High Court in Pretoria allowed Pratt to amend her plea, but she lost again.After several more rounds in court, Pratt's application in April this year to prevent FirstRand executing the order - which would compel her to repay nearly R20-million plus interest and costs - was dismissed by Tuchten last week.The judge said Pratt had been "less than forthcoming about her financial position" and "has had what I might call a Rolls-Royce ride through the highways of the South African legal system".He asked: "What has she done with the money? Why are the capital sum and its proceeds over the last 13 years not available for repayment? What and where are Ms Pratt's assets? Ms Pratt does not provide answers to any of these questions. Nothing prevents her from paying to the extent of her financial resources what the courts have said she owes, instituting her action and recovering what she has paid, with interest, if and when she is ultimately successful."Pratt was not available to comment on the ruling. Her lawyer, Ian Levitt, said this week that she maintained she had been defrauded and had opened criminal charges against FirstRand Bank: "Our client is persisting with appealing the judgment, [while continuing] with her criminal complaint because there is still a lot of evidence that has yet to be unearthed." If at first you don't succeed, appeal, appeal, appeal again - for 13 years 1999: Pratt owns 20% of Anne Pratt and Nyasulu. A Ms Nyasulu owns 10%. Monument Trust Company - endorsed by the Reserve Bank as non-South African - owns 70%.2000: Fast Track Trust (Isle of Man), of which Pratt is "beneficiary or perhaps controller", buys the 70% of Anne Pratt and Nyasulu's shares held by Monument for R700. Nyasulu sells her 10% to Pratt, and the company name changes to Anne Pratt & Associates.2001: FirstRand lends Pratt R25-million.2002: Pratt becomes the sole member of Classy Living CC and either lends it or makes available to it the R25-million. Classy Living uses the money to buy 70% of Anne Pratt & Associates from Fast Track (which has retained Monument's non-resident status). The R25-million is transferred to a Fast Track bank account in Jersey.September 2003: Pratt applies to the High Court in Pretoria for an order declaring the loan transaction null and void because the R25-million had been exported in contravention of an exchange-control regulation. FirstRand files a counterclaim for enforcement of the loan agreement, or for the R25-million plus interest based on unjustified enrichment. Pratt loses her case.September 2008: Pratt loses again in the Supreme Court of Appeal.July 2010: Pratt is allowed by the High Court in Pretoria to amend her plea to the counterclaim to allege that FirstRand devised and implemented the transaction with the fraudulent intention of circumventing the exchange-control regulation and that the transaction was void. She loses the case again.September 2014: Pratt loses again in the appeal court.November 2015: Pratt's bid to try another variant of the fraud defence is refused by the court, as is her application for leave to appeal against the refusal.December 3 2015: The court rules that Pratt must pay FirstRand R19.6-million, interest reckoned from 2007 and costs. She applies for leave to appeal and later for a postponement of this application.March 30 2016: The court refuses both applications.April 13 2016: Pratt applies to the High Court in Pretoria for an interdict precluding FirstRand from executing the judgment, pending the outcome of an action yet to be instituted to set it aside - and all the judgments that preceded it. Pratt asserts that FirstRand obtained the judgments by fraud.June 30 2016: The application is dismissed and Pratt is again told to pay First Rand's costs...