-lawyers argue
In objecting to the sale of its assets, Clico (Guyana) said that Judicial Manager Maria van Beek closed all of its business offices without a single attempt to operate any line or class of insurance business.
Since the company has insisted that it is in a position to operate some lines of business, Clico’s attorneys approached Chief Justice (ag) Ian Chang last week days after he had granted an order approving the sale of Clico’s immovable assets and succeeded in obtaining a stay on the order until the court hearing is determined.
Clico argued in an ex-parte application that the sale of the assets is disadvantageous to the company and likely to cause extreme hardship should the claims of the Judicial Manager be proved unsubstantiated. Clico’s attorneys, Roysdale Forde and Stephen Lewis, contended that the initial application by Assistant Commissioner of Insurance Tracey Gibson for an order approving the sale of the assets amounted to a breach of justice as (the company) was not afforded any opportunity to challenge the order before it was made. They argued that the application disclosed no circumstance or fact that warranted an ex-parte hearing when the entire proceedings are inter-partes, adding that the application had set out no exceptional circumstances of urgency to move the court to grant the orders ex-parte.
The attorneys referred to the application by Gibson as bad in law stating that the Rules of Court does not authorize the application as filed.
They said also that the Office of the Judicial Manager is non-delegable and consequently, that the affidavit sworn to by Gibson has no legal validity.
They said also that Gibson’s application was in contravention of Section 72 of the Insurance Act of 1998, as it provides inter alia, firstly, a hearing at which the respondent (Clico) is entitled to be heard.
And referring to a section of Gibson’s sworn affidavit about Clico’s properties having commercial value and “are at the risk of losing value due to vandalism and non-occupation,” the lawyers said that there has been no averment as to the risk of vandalism and non-occupation.
The company also referred to a previous statement the Judicial Manager made in an earlier application to the court. It stated the averment that Premium Security Inc is a subsidiary of CL Financial is “completely untrue and incorrect” and provided the court with a copy of the Articles of Incorporation.
The company said that the Articles of Incorporation reveals that the incorporator of the security company is Geeta Singh-Knight, former Chief Executive Officer of Clico (Guyana). “…the aforesaid Article of Incorporation also reveals that Geeta Singh-Knight, the Chief Executive Officer who was suspended by the Directors and Shareholders of the Respondent and thereafter promptly and expeditiously hired as the Assistant to the Judicial Manager, was also at all material times a Director of Premium Security,” court documents said.
Clico argued that the decision of the Judicial Manager to employ Singh-Knight as her assistant brings into serious question the judgment, conduct and recommendation of the Judicial Manager.
Justice Chang had granted an order approving the sale of seven immovable properties and businesses owned by Clico (Guyana), and allowing also for the monies earned to be placed in the statutory fund for the benefit of policyholders.
The order, which was granted in an ex parte application by Senior Counsel Ashton Chase on Thursday, also allows for proceeds from the sales to be put away to meet current and future obligations of the cash-strapped insurance company.
In the affidavit seeking the order, Gibson said that Clico has seven immovable properties in Guyana – including a huge, recently completed head office – that have commercial value and “are at the risk of losing value due to vandalism and non-occupation”.
The hearing continued before Justice Chang yesterday, but was adjourned for Chase to file an affidavit in answer on behalf of the Judicial Manager.
