CHIEF Justice (ag) Roxanne George-Wiltshire on Tuesday ruled that the Orders of Rule Nisi of Certiorari and Prohibition granted on March 10, 2017, against the Minister of Finance and the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) in the case of Inshanally Bacchus, trading under the name and style of I & R Bacchus Trucking Service, be discharged.

Bacchus, the applicant, on March 2, by way of Prerogative Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition, instituted proceedings against the Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, and Fitzroy Corlette, Head of Law Enforcement, GRA, (the Respondents) calling for, inter alia, an Order or Rule Nisi of Certiorari to be directed to the Minister of Finance.
The finance minister on November 23, 2016, made a decision which terminated an Investment Development Mineral Prospecting, Mining and Stone Quarrying Agreement entered into on March 13, 2014, by and between the Government of Guyana, represented by the Minister of Finance, and the applicant.

Bacchus had been granted concessions on duties and taxes under the agreement with the Government and noted that he was not the holder of any mining concession.

BLAME
He blamed the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) for the blunder.
In his Affidavit in support of a Notice of Motion, Bacchus said that on October 29, 2013, he had entered into a written agreement with the Bauxite Company of Guyana Inc. (BCGI), to carry out specific mining operations mainly at Kurubuka, Upper Berbice River, to evacuate and transport bauxite overburden.

By letter, Bacchus said he applied to former Minister of Natural Resources and the Environment, Robert Persaud, for a waiver of duties and taxes on a list of trucks and machinery.
The waiver was granted but before signing the agreement, he said he informed the GGMC that he was not a miner and was only concerned with excavation and transportation of bauxite to varying locations.

The applicant said he was told that the agreement was a standard one used by the GGMC to recommend the granting of concessions to applicants. Bacchus said he signed the agreement, which was also signed by former finance minister, Dr Ashni Singh, and witnessed by a GRA officer and a representative from GGMC.

Thereafter, Bacchus said he applied to the Commissioner General of GRA for VAT exemptions on the equipment for which he required the exemptions. He was granted exemptions for heavy-duty caterpillar equipment.

On April 2, 2014, Bacchus said he received a letter from GGMC officers to apply to the GRA for exemptions on the items contained in the list approved by the Minister of Finance and was told that copies of invoices and worksheets for every consignment or cargo imported ought to be submitted before the items arrived, so as to facilitate timely processing of the application for tax exemptions.

The Bush Lot Berbice businessman said he had ordered eight Caterpillar trucks and one Caterpillar excavator, costing approximately $464M. He was granted tax exemptions for the machinery on April 16, 2014. The machinery arrived subsequently and after the tax exemptions were applied, they were transported to the mining operation at Kurubuka.
Another request for tax exemptions were made in July 2014 and approval, he said, was granted 16 days later. The exemption was for vehicles and equipment valued $960M. Upon expiration of his contract with BCGI in the last quarter of 2015 and the fact that his equipment were parked for several months until the following year when he was contracted by China Habour Inc. to transport sand and loam for the ongoing construction works at Timehri.

BREACH OF AGREEMENT
In November, 2016, Bacchus said he received a letter from Corlette, indicating that an investigation conducted by GRA revealed that he (Bacchus) was not the holder of a Prospecting Licence, Mining Permit, Privilege or any other licence issued by GGMC and as such he was in breach of his agreement with the Government.
As a result, Bacchus was told that he would be required to pay within 14 days, $212M, representing duties and taxes due and payable on the machinery and vehicles he had imported.

Bacchus stated that it was through a subsequent letter from Corlette that he first learnt of the termination of his agreement with Government. It was as a result of GRA’s demand for the money and threat of seizure of Bacchus’ equipment that caused him to approach the High Court through his attorney Anil Nandlall.

Nandlall begged the court to grant several orders as well as costs to his client and Chief Justice (ag), at the time, Yonette Cummings-Edwards granted provisional orders quashing the Government’s decision to revoke an investment agreement and the demand made by GRA for him to pay $212M in customs duties and taxes.

Justice Cummings-Edwards issued an Order or Rule Nisi of Certiorari quashing the minister’s decision and called on him to show cause why the order should not be made absolute. She also ordered that an Order or Rule Nisi of Certiorari be directed to Corlette, quashing his demand for Bacchus to pay the $212M and that he must show cause why the Order should not be made absolute.

An Order or Rule Nisi of Prohibition was also issued to the GRA, stopping any seizure, forfeiture and/or disposal of machinery, equipment and motor vehicles belonging to Bacchus and requesting that cause must be shown why the order should not be made absolute.

However, when the matter was brought up on Tuesday before Justice George-Wiltshire, the applicant unsuccessfully made an application for further time to lay over submissions.
The Court found that the failure of the applicant to disclose in his application that he had signed, not one but three, Supplementary Investment Development Mineral Prospecting, Mining and Stone Quarrying Agreements, was material non-disclosure and as such cannot rely on a plea of non-Est factum.

The said documents were brought to the attention of the court through the Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. The court discharged the Orders Nisi of Certiorari and Prohibition granted by Justice Cummings-Edwards for material non-disclosure on the part of the applicant and awarded costs to each respondent in the sum of $50,000.