CCJ hears…
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), in down-town Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), in down-town Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago

Ogle airport name change ‘unfair’, ‘irrational’

THE Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Tuesday heard arguments in the case filed by seven domestic airline operators to challenge the 2016 remaining of the Ogle airport, and a ruling is imminent.
Air Services Limited, Roraima Airways Limited, Phoenix Airways, Hinterland Aviation, Domestic Airways, Wings Aviation Limited, Hopkinson Mining Aviation, and the National Air Transport Association (NATA), an association formed by them, had managed to secure an injunction to prevent the renaming of the airport. However, the matter was subsequently discharged.
The aerodrome was, on May 9, 2016, renamed the Eugene F. Correia International Airport by then President David Granger.
Legal challenges filed by the operators in the High Court and the Court of Appeal were unsuccessful, and resulted in their resort to the Trinidad-based CCJ, which is Guyana’s final appeal court.
On Tuesday, a five-member panel comprising Justices Peter Jamadar, Jacob Wit, Winston Anderson, Denys Barrow and Andrew Burgess virtually entertained full arguments in the case.
The operators/applicants were represented by Attorneys-at-law Devindra Kissoon and Natasha Vieria, while the Solicitor-General, Nigel Hawke, appeared for the Attorney- General, who is a named respondent in the case.

The Eugene F. Correia International Airport

In his submission to the court, Kissoon contended that the changing of the Ogle International Airport (OIA)’s name was unfair and irrational, because proper consultations were not held with his clients.
The OAI was incorporated in 2000, with five equal shareholders, each owning 20% of the shares, and each being a director of the company. Since then, the Correia Group of Companies has secured control of more than half of the shares, and has a monopoly over fuel and the leasing of lands for domestic airspace.
By way of letters in 2015, the airline services complained to former Minister of Public Infrastructure, David Patterson about the issues surrounding the changing of the airport’s name, and its likely impact on their operations.
Granger had also written to Patterson on the subject, with the aim of having the issues resolved.
“Fairness would have dictated that the government and minister consult with the persons who would have been affected by the name change. All domestic airline operators who have complained about something that could have potentially affected them, at the very least, he [Patterson] should have heard them,” Kissoon submitted.
Kissoon also submitted that his clients should have been consulted before the changing of the name, and on other issues stemming from the said problem.
However, this argument did not sit well with the Solicitor-General, who submitted that there were proper consultations.

According to him, then subject minister, David Patterson had acted, based on a letter from the OAI’s Board of Directors, which stated that there was a unanimous decision to change the name.
Hawke contended that on the face of the evidence, the issue stems from a private grievance.
Judge Burgess highlighted several points raised by Hawke, one of which was that according to the records, the Guyana Court of Appeal, in its ruling, had said, “It is the view of this court that the appellants appear to have grievance with the Correia Group, and have attempted to use public law procedures to address private grievances.”
Justice Burgess said that if this point was found to be true, it would have brought an end to the matter. Kissoon quickly denied that his clients had grievances with the Correia Group.
The applicants, in part, are seeking a judicial review of Patterson’s approval of that name change.
They had applied for special leave, on August 25, 2020, to appeal the decision of the Guyana Court of Appeal on many grounds. However, the CCJ granted special leave only on the grounds addressing whether the minister had a duty to consult with the applicants before approving the suggested name change.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.