…calls on private attorneys to return matters

ATTORNEYS who are currently working on or have been assigned cases through the Attorney General’s (AG) Chambers prior to May 2015 have been asked to submit in writing a list of said cases before May 7 to the Chambers.

In a notice published in the Guyana Chronicle on Wednesday, the AG’s Chambers said those not authorised by the current AG, Basil Williams, SC to represent the chambers in outstanding matters are required to “immediately notify the chambers of the said matters.” “You are asked to give a written report to the Honourable Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Senior Counsel Basil Williams, MP, regarding the status of each case for which you have conduct,” the notice stated.

Over the past few months, Williams said that in many cases inherited from the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) administration, no documentation can be sourced at his office. He said oftentimes cases had been outsourced, but no reports were filed at the AG’s Chambers, an act he described as in contravention of norms.

In the November 2017 Dipcon Engineering Limited case against the government, where the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) dismissed an appeal by the AG of Guyana in the $446M contractual dispute, Williams told reporters that the case is one of several inherited from the PPP.

He stressed that no notice was given to the APNU+AFC coalition government until the period allotted under the rules of the Court of Appeal to appeal, had expired. “Further to that, there was no evidence of the file at the AG’s chambers – it is a new AG and it wasn’t until February at the budget that I was informed by the leader of the opposition about the case.”

The CCJ dismissed the AG’s request and awarded costs to the Trinidad company to the tune of US$2.2M and ordered that the judgment delivered more than two years prior be enforced. The CCJ ruled that the appeal concerns a procedural issue and does not fall within the ambit of Section 6 of the CCJ Act. In fact, the court said Section 6 does not give a right of appeal against the Court of Appeal’s refusal to enlarge time for appealing and that the appropriate recourse in such a situation is to apply to the CCJ for special leave to appeal, pursuant to section 8 of the CCJ Act.

“In the absence of acceptable justification for failing to file these applications, the court concluded that it had no jurisdiction to allow the state to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s refusal to grant an extension of time,” the summary stated.

Notwithstanding that, the court acknowledged that it may, in a proper case, grant an extension of time to comply with the rules to avert a clear miscarriage of justice. Back then, the AG had indicated that the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) would be asked to probe cases where attorneys recruited to act on behalf of the state, in turn represent the intended opponent.

Similarly, last month’s ruling by the High Court to have government pay over $1.7B in damages to Toolsie Persaud Limited (TPL) after losing its challenge to that company’s ownership of land at Turkeyen, East Coast Demerara (ECD), resulted in a similar claim by the AG. Part of the land in question houses land occupied by MovieTowne cinema and shopping mall. “There is no way we are going to allow that 1.7B judgment to stand without scrutiny,” said Williams, who indicated that the state would appeal the case. On the sidelines of the 3rd annual International Commercial Arbitration Conference held here last week, the AG indicated that the TPL case mirrors that of Dipcon Engineering Limited, which was inherited by the APNU+AFC coalition government.

“The Toolsie Persaud case is just like the Dipcon case. My chambers had no knowledge of the case, there is no file in the chambers …we are surprised that we are represented by the old regime under Mr Nandlall.”The state was represented by Ashton Chase. “We are investigating it now and of course we will appeal it,” he assured, noting that his office had requested a list of cases outstanding from the chief justice and the Court of Appeal as well as certain practitioners.

Williams said it is unusual for the state to outsource a case and not have any record of same. He told the Guyana Chronicle that while he had received responses from the chief justice, Court of Appeal and the practitioners asked, none made mention of the case. “Yes, but no case like that. We weren’t told they had the case…we have to examine now, look at it and read the records. If you had a case since 2008, weren’t you supposed to bring in the case?” Williams said too that the crime chief was asked to probe cases where attorneys recruited to act on behalf of the state, in turn represent the intended opponent.