Underscoring the need for a Town Clerk to the functioning of the Municipality, High Court Judge Jo-Ann Barlow has refused the grant of an injunction barring acting Town Clerk Candace Nelson from performing duties.
The legal challenge initiated by the Georgetown Mayor and City Councillors (M&CC) for Nelson’s removal contends that her appointment is unlawful, and accuses her of disruptive actions that could affect the Council’s ability to meet its obligations.
Citing the interest of the wider public and the need for a functioning Town Clerk, however, Justice Barlow noted when the case was called yesterday morning, that the Court would not exercise its discretion to grant the injunction which the M&CC was seeking.
The judge also considered Nelson’s application to have the action against her struck out, but this, too, was dismissed.
Having dispensed with the preliminary issues, the Court has ordered the Local Government Commission (the Defendant), to file its defence within the next 14 days and for the Claimant to file any necessary responses within seven days thereafter.
Meanwhile, the substantive matter has been fixed for case management conference (CMC) on October 6th.
Legal papers seen by this newspaper list the “Town Clerk of Georgetown” as the claimant, a move with which Nelson has taken umbrage, arguing that the Council can only sue and be sued in the name of the Town Clerk; even as she noted that she did not initiate the proceedings against herself.
Nelson, who is being represented by attorneys Nigel Hughes and Teni Housty, has since said that Mayor Ubraj Narine has claimed that it was he who signed the legal papers. “Something is seriously wrong with that,” she had said in a statement that was issued after an aborted statutory meeting of the Council last month at which she was given notice of the challenge to the Commission’s decision to appoint her to act as Town Clerk.
Nelson has argued that there is no precedent for Narine to have done what he did by signing the legal papers.
Section 6 of the Municipal and District Councils Act states, “The City Council may sue and be sued by and in the name of “The Town Clerk of Georgetown.” In addition, according to Section 8 of the Sixth Schedule of the Act, which addresses the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Town Clerk, where any document is required as a necessary step in legal proceedings on behalf of the Council, the Clerk shall sign unless a law otherwise requires or authorises, or the Council has given the necessary authority to some other person for the purpose of the proceedings.
According to the application that was seen by this newspaper, the conduct of Nelson, whom it says “is acting without property authority,” will continue to have a “disrupting effect on the smooth and efficient functioning” of the Council.
Among the grounds its cites is the complaint that Nelson, “since her attempted installation as the Town Clerk Acting, has taken a number of disruptive actions which pose serious ongoing continuing breaches that compromise the sanctity of the operations” of the M&CC.
It adds that Nelson suspended a tendering process which commenced months before her July 27th appointment and has “potentially compromised” the ability of the M&CC to honour its contractual and other financial obligations.
It also says Nelson has not facilitated a “proper handover of the [Council’s] assets,” while expressing fears that unless removed she will further disrupt the Council’s activities. The application seeks Nelson’s removal and an interim order staying her appointment, while contending that her “purporting” to act under the power of the Local Government Com-mission is “inimical” to the best interest of the Council, the city, its infrastructure and residents.
While the members of the Commission unanimously agreed that former acting Town Clerk Sherry Jerrick be reverted to her substantive position of Assistant Town Clerk, the Commission’s Chairman Julius Faerber made the decision to appoint Nelson in consultation with Deputy Chairman Norman Whittaker.
Faerber has said his actions are in keeping with the Commission’s legal practice, while noting that appointing a replacement was critical since the position of Town Clerk could not remain vacant. Two opposition-nominated members of the Commission have questioned the legality of his actions, while the majority APNU members of the Council have maintained that he acted illegally.
