Two years after being slapped with a $20m default judgment and filing a series of appeals in a bid to evade payment to former government Minister Annette Ferguson whom he had defamed, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has found himself back to having to honour that initial ruling and whatever award for damages will be imposed against him for libel.
Stabroek News understands that the Guyana Court of Appeal yesterday dismissed motions which Jagdeo had filed against the initial High Court order.
Further, the Court of Appeal has ordered that the matter be remitted to Justice Sandra Kurtzious to award damages for libel.
A date is now to be fixed for the case to be called again before Justice Kurtzious.
Jagdeo had filed motions for special leave to appeal the decision of the Full Court.
Jagdeo had appealed Justice Kurtzious’ ruling to the Full Court which had delivered a split decision with acting Chief Justice Roxane George SC ruling that the default judgment should stand; while Justice Priya Sewnarine-Beharry’s position was that it should be vacated.
As a result, the Vice President then sought an order from the very Full Court to have his appeal of its decision be remitted to three fresh Judges of the Full Court to hear and determine that appeal.
While that application was pending before the Chief Justice and Justice Sewnarine-Beharry, Jagdeo also moved to the Court of Appeal with an intended appeal to challenge the split decision.
Both the Chief Justice and Justice Sewnarine-Beharry refused Jagdeo’s application on the basis that Section 77 of the High Court Act—gives only to the Chief Justice—the power to appoint three judges instead of two to hear an appeal to the Full Court.
The judges had also further ruled that a simultaneous application meant that a higher court was seized with jurisdiction to hear the matter and that Jagdeo could not have two similar applications before two different courts.
In a press release, Ferguson’s attorney Lyndon Amsterdam, said that the appellate court relied on Section 79 of the High Court Act and Sections 6(1)(2) of its own Act to find that it lacked the jurisdiction to grant special leave.
He said in the release that this was underscored against the background of the Full Court refusing to give permission for a fresh appeal to the Full Court where three instead of two judges would hear the appeal.
The Court of Appeal has awarded costs against Jagdeo in the sum of $100,000.
The motions before the Court of Appeal were heard by Chancellor (Ag) Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justices of Appeal Rishi Persaud and Dawn Gregory.
Background
Jagdeo’s contention had been that Justice Kurtzious erred by entering a default judgment against him without considering all the grounds of his draft defence, including but not limited to the defence of justification; by failing to appreciate the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules in ensuring justice between both parties.
Justice Kurtzious had imposed the default judgment against Jagdeo, because he had failed to file his defence on time, in the libel suit Ferguson had brought against him; which the Judge found did defame her, regarding certain statements he had made concerning her acquisition of land.
In her ruling, Justice Kurtzious had said that contrary to advancements made by attorney Devindra Kissoon who represented Jagdeo, Ferguson’s application for a default judgment was well within the ambit of the CPR; while noting that her attorney had satisfied the requirements for the grant thereunder.
Justice Kurtzious had said she found the explanations proffered by Jagdeo for not complying with filing his defence within the 28-day time period specified by the CPR, to have been wholly “unreasonable.”
Jagdeo’s excuse had been that both he and his then attorney Anil Nandlall were busy with preparations for General and Regional Elections at the time.
The judge had said she also found that Jagdeo’s defence contained no real prospect of success.
The Judge said that finding there existed material which could have put Jagdeo on notice that the statements he uttered against Ferguson would have in fact amounted to defamation, his defences of fair comment, justification, qualified privilege and his use of the Defamation Act were all irrelevant.
She had said that he did not seek to verify the truth of what he had said about Ferguson.
In those circumstances Justice Kurtzious affirmed her earlier ruling granting Ferguson the $20 million award, stating that she stands to be prejudiced by suffering financial loss and injury to her character.
The judge then imposed $75,000 costs against Jagdeo which was also to be paid to Ferguson.
At the time, she had ordered the parties to return before her a month later for a full assessment of the quantum of damages.
Her ruling had, however, been stayed after Jagdeo filed his appeal before the Full Court.
In January of 2020, Ferguson filed a $60m lawsuit against Jagdeo—the then Opposition Leader, over what she said were libellous statements made by him and Guyana Times newspaper, calculated to damage her character and reputation.
In her suit against Jagdeo, Ferguson sought damages in excess of $50,000,000 for libel she said he committed on two separate occasions—December 5th and 12th of 2019 for which she was asking for more than $25m in damages for each occasion.
