Acting Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire SC has ruled that the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL) unlawfully terminated a number of agreements regarding the lease of previously shuttered estate lands.
The estate lands in question were those of Wales and Enmore.
In her ruling delivered yesterday afternoon, the Chief Justice said that the government holding company could not, as it had contended terminate the leases on grounds of wanting the lands for its own use.
Against that background, the Chief Justice said that the termination notices sent by NICIL were invalid and that the agreement for lease of the lands in question remain enforceable.
The Claimants—Carol Trim-Bagot, Tristion Cordis Trading, Universal Group of Companies Inc, Derrick Lawrence, Claer-mont Andrew Austin, Dennis Austin, Ian Adams-Edwards, Dacia Walters, Namela Baynes-Henry and Clinton Williams—had all argued that their leases had been terminated in breach of their agreements.
In granting the declaration sought by the Claimants to revoke NICIL’s decision, Justice George-Wiltshire also imposed a permanent injunction against it from interfering with the Appli-cants’ quiet and peaceful enjoyment of their properties.
No orders were made as to cost.
Among other things, the Claimants sought and were granted a declaration that by virtue of statements and conduct of NICIL, they had a legitimate expectation to right of occupation of portions of GuySuCo’s property leased to each of them.
The agreements had been granted in 2018, 2019 and last year, and the Claimants had advanced that it was done against the background of NICIL’s policy “to divest and dispose of assets of GuySuCo.
Through its attorney Devindra Kissoon, NICIL said that the Statement of Claim did not disclose any reasonable ground for the claim being brought in the first place, and that it was bad in law, frivolous and vexatious.
NICIL claimed, too, that the claim constituted an abuse of the court’s process and that constitutional relief could not be granted against NICIL—a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act—and that it was also not amenable to Judicial Review.
The holding company had also argued against the court’s jurisdiction, stating that the matters should have been referred to arbitration.
The Court, however, found that this was not the case and that it had the jurisdiction to hear and determine the matters and to grant the reliefs sought.
The claimants were represented by various attorneys including Senior Counsel Edward Luckhoo, Robin Stoby, Robin Hunte and Timothy Jonas.
