JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Sunday, May 4, 2025

Junior Sammy’s $3.5m court levy delayed

by

2062 days ago
20190911
Junior Sammy

Junior Sammy

A con­tract­ing com­pa­ny was yes­ter­day forced to tem­porar­i­ly with­draw its levy against Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors Lim­it­ed over an un­paid $3.5 mil­lion court judge­ment. 

Court mar­shals, po­lice of­fi­cers and lawyers rep­re­sent­ing West­ern Gen­er­al Con­trac­tors Ser­vices Lim­it­ed went to Ju­nior Sam­my’s com­pound in Clax­ton Bay, around 6 am yes­ter­day morn­ing, to ex­e­cute the judge­ment and be­gin the process of seiz­ing items to re­cov­er the debt. 

How­ev­er be­fore they could en­ter, the Reg­is­trar of the Supreme Court in­struct­ed them to put the process on hold as Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors had ap­plied for a stay of the judge­ment pend­ing an ap­peal. 

The Reg­is­trar al­so gave the com­pa­ny un­til No­vem­ber 8 to have its stay ap­pli­ca­tion de­ter­mined. 

In its claim be­fore Jus­tice Ron­nie Boodoos­ingh, West­ern Gen­er­al Con­trac­tors claimed that it was owed $3.25 mil­lion for sub-con­tract­ing work it had per­formed for Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors be­tween De­cem­ber 2013 and Feb­ru­ary 2015. 

West­ern Gen­er­al Con­trac­tors claimed that Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors had no com­plaints about its per­for­mance but on­ly paid for a por­tion of the work.  

In its de­fence, Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors chal­lenged the sub­con­trac­tor’s claims as it al­leged that its work was per­formed im­prop­er­ly and in an un­work­man­like man­ner. 

It al­so claimed that West­ern Gen­er­al Con­trac­tors did not fol­low its in­ter­nal pay­ment pol­i­cy when it sub­mit­ted in­voic­es for pay­ments and that some of the in­voic­es were in­flat­ed.

 Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors al­so filed a counter-claim in which it al­leged that it suf­fered al­most $3 mil­lion in loss­es as it was forced to re-do the sub­con­trac­tor’s work as it did not meet the ap­proval of its clients. 

In his 46-page judge­ment, de­liv­ered in March, Jus­tice Boodoos­ingh up­held the sub­con­trac­tor’s case as he not­ed that Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors had pre­vi­ous­ly ho­n­oured the in­voic­es, which it claimed had been im­prop­er­ly sub­mit­ted.

“This went against the very process ad­vanced by the de­fen­dants that the in­voic­es had to be ver­i­fied by send­ing to the head of­fice, then re­turn­ing to the site for ver­i­fi­ca­tion,” Boodoos­ingh said. 

He al­so ques­tioned Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors’ claim over the qual­i­ty of the work, as he point­ed out that it was on­ly raised in the law­suit. 

“I found it dif­fi­cult to be­lieve that the de­fen­dant would be dis­sat­is­fied with the work be­ing done to the ex­tent they al­lege, have to re-do work be­cause of the sub-stan­dard work and this would not gen­er­ate one writ­ten com­plaint. Sure­ly the de­fen­dants would have been con­cerned about their own rep­u­ta­tion with their clients,” Boodoos­ingh said. 

In ad­di­tion to or­der­ing Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors to ho­n­our the debt, Boodoos­ingh al­so or­dered it to pay five per cent in­ter­est on the sum from the date when the sub­con­trac­tor filed its law­suit. 

West­ern Gen­er­al Con­trac­tors is be­ing rep­re­sent­ed by Alvin Pariags­ingh and Ganesh Sa­roop, while Jagdeo Singh, Ka­ri­na Singh, and De­siree Sankar are rep­re­sent­ing Ju­nior Sam­my Con­trac­tors. 


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored