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.

Saturday, March 29, 2025

CCJ reserves British American lawsuit

by

Derek Achong
332 days ago
20240501

A large group of British Amer­i­can In­sur­ance Com­pa­ny (BAICO) pol­i­cy­hold­ers from sev­er­al East­ern Caribbean coun­tries will have to wait to learn the fate of their law­suit over a move by the T&T gov­ern­ment to bail out on­ly lo­cal fi­nan­cial sub­sidiaries of CL Fi­nan­cial (CLF). 

Caribbean Court of Jus­tice (CCJ) pres­i­dent Adri­an Saun­ders and judges Win­ston An­der­son, Mau­reen Ra­j­nauth-Lee, An­drew Burgess, and Pe­ter Ja­madar re­served their judge­ment in the case af­ter hear­ing sub­mis­sions at the court’s head­quar­ters in Port-of-Spain be­tween Mon­day and yes­ter­day. 

“The court will take time for its de­ci­sion in this mat­ter. We will let you know in due course when we are ready to ren­der a de­ci­sion,” said Saun­ders, at the end of yes­ter­day’s sit­ting.

In the law­suit, the group is con­tend­ing that the Gov­ern­ment breached the Re­vised Treaty of Ch­aguara­mas (RTC), which es­tab­lished the Caribbean Sin­gle Mar­ket and Econ­o­my (CSME), by bail­ing out cer­tain lo­cal CLF sub­sidiaries such as Cli­co and British Amer­i­can (Trinidad) and not re­gion­al sub­sidiaries such as BAICO. 

The group is claim­ing that while lo­cal pol­i­cy­hold­ers were pro­tect­ed and es­sen­tial­ly guar­an­teed their full in­vest­ments, the East­ern Caribbean pol­i­cy­hold­ers were on­ly able to re­coup ap­prox­i­mate­ly 14 per cent of their in­vest­ments through the liq­ui­da­tion of the re­gion­al sub­sidiary.

Pre­sent­ing sub­mis­sions on be­half of the group, King’s Coun­sel Si­mon Dav­en­port claimed that the Gov­ern­ment’s ac­tions breached Ar­ti­cle 7 of the RTC, which pro­hibits dis­crim­i­na­tion based on na­tion­al­i­ty. 

“Every Caribbean per­son is equal be­fore the law,” Dav­en­port said. 

He claimed that as­sets of British Amer­i­can In­ter­na­tion­al Com­pa­ny (BAICO), the hold­ing com­pa­ny for British Amer­i­can Trinidad, were used in the bailout, but the T&T Gov­ern­ment did not ac­cept its li­a­bil­i­ties, in­clud­ing to pol­i­cy­hold­ers. 

“CL Fi­nan­cial did not dis­tin­guish among group com­pa­nies un­less ab­solute­ly nec­es­sary,” he said. 

“This case is not go­ing to bank­rupt T&T. The amounts are sig­nif­i­cant but are on­ly a frac­tion of the monies in­ject­ed and now re­cov­ered by T&T,”  he added. 

Dav­en­port re­ferred to a US$100 mil­lion fund that was promised by the Gov­ern­ment un­der the tenure of for­mer prime min­is­ter Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar dur­ing a Cari­com Heads of Gov­ern­ment meet­ing, held in Ju­ly 2012 in St Lu­cia. 

He not­ed that T&T on­ly made an ini­tial US$36 mil­lion con­tri­bu­tion and promised to fi­nance part of the re­main­der through a loan. 

Dav­en­port claimed that the T&T gov­ern­ment al­so breached Ar­ti­cle 184 of the RTC, which re­quires mem­ber states to pro­mote the in­ter­ests of con­sumers by pro­vid­ing ad­e­quate and ef­fec­tive re­dress. 

He ad­mit­ted that if the Gov­ern­ment did not take any ac­tion to pro­tect its lo­cal pol­i­cy­hold­ers, then his clients would not have a valid claim against it. 

Re­spond­ing to the sub­mis­sions, Se­nior Coun­sel Deb­o­rah Peake not­ed that there was no ev­i­dence that BAICO’s as­sets were used in the bailout. 

She said when the Gov­ern­ment signed a Mem­o­ran­dum of Un­der­stand­ing (MoU) with CL Fi­nan­cial for the bailout in 2009, on­ly three lo­cal sub­sidiaries Cli­co, BAT and Cli­co In­vest­ment Bank (CIB) were un­der con­sid­er­a­tion and not CLF’s 39 oth­er lo­cal, re­gion­al and in­ter­na­tion­al sub­sidiaries such as BAICO.

“This case as­sumes that they (BAICO) were un­der con­sid­er­a­tion.” she said, as she not­ed that the claimants had to prove that the Gov­ern­ment know­ing­ly ex­clud­ed re­gion­al pol­i­cy­hold­ers. 

She sug­gest­ed that the group’s case was based on a mis­un­der­stand­ing of the RTC.

“The RTC was for free trade with­in a cus­toms union not to frus­trate a gov­ern­ment which is pro­tect­ing its coun­try’s econ­o­my,” she said.    

Deal­ing with Dav­en­port’s claims over con­sumer pro­tec­tion re­quire­ments, Peake sug­gest­ed that such pro­vi­sions were meant to deal with an­ti-com­pet­i­tive be­hav­iour. 

“It is not rea­son­able to use it when the mar­ket has col­lapsed,” she said. 

Ad­dress­ing the US$100 mil­lion fund, Peake sug­gest­ed that it was not bind­ing or en­force­able as it was not a de­ci­sion made by re­gion­al lead­ers. 

“It was a com­mit­ment,” she said, as she not­ed that in Ju­ly 2016, the Min­istry of Fi­nance wrote to the Gov­er­nor of the East­ern Caribbean Cen­tral Bank to in­di­cate that a loan from the Caribbean De­vel­op­ment Bank was not ap­proved and that fur­ther fund­ing was not pos­si­ble due to the un­favourable eco­nom­ic en­vi­ron­ment.  

“Where were tax­pay­ers to find funds to treat all the sub­sidiaries the same way? This is not ground­ed in re­al­i­ty,” she sa. 

The group, which filed the law­suit in the names of El­lis Richards, Spencer Thomas and the Med­ical Ben­e­fit Board, was rep­re­sent­ed by for­mer St Lu­cia Prime Min­is­ter Dr Ken­ny An­tho­ny, Robert Strang, Gre­go­ry Pan­tin, Matthew Hap­pold, George Kirnon and­Miguel Vasquez. 

Tama­ra Toolsie, Brent James, Mur­vani Ojah Ma­haraj ap­peared along­side Peake for T&T. 


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored