Grenada seeking agreement with Dipcon over Privy Council ruling
by Leroy Noel
Friday, April 9, 2004
ST. GEORGE‘S, Grenada: The Grenada
government plans to seek an agreement with Dipcon Engineering Services Ltd who
recently won a major court battle in the Privy Council requiring Grenada to
pay over $17 million plus interest and costs.
The British Law Lords, overturning the January 2002 decision of the Court of
Appeal of the OECS, have in effect ordered that the government to pay to
Dipcon the sum ordered by Justice Brian Alleyne.
A statement from the Ministry of Legal Affairs says the judgment of the
Judicial Committee is final and cannot be questioned or disregarded and the
government will seek to alleviate the effect of this judgment on the economy
of the nation by seeking agreement with Dipcon or, if that fails, by a further
Court Order establishing a schedule of payment over a period of several years.
The statement added that upon coming into office in 1995, the New National
Party government met a contract signed by the previous administration on
September 30, 1994, which gave Dipcon, the right to use government's quarry
and equipment in return for the payment of a royalty based on sales and an
annual rent. By November 1995, Dipcon was in arrears of royalties and rent in
excess of EC$ 286,000.
The Grenada government is also saying that
Dipcon had failed to produce the crushed stone of the quality and quantity
required for the paving of the Eastern Main Road Rehabilitation Project. As a
result, Grenada was in danger of losing millions of dollars in grant funds
allocated for the project by the European Union (EU). After receiving
technical and legal advice, the government of Grenada terminated Dipcon's
contract, and was then able to complete the project to the satisfaction of the
EU. Dipcon filed a claim against government
in January 1996 and in December of that year judgment was entered in default
of any defence having been filed. The merits of Government's defence have
never been tried by any court. It is worthy of note that Mr. Justice Singh,
giving judgment in the Court of Appeal, stated that Government had an arguable
defence, and this statement was not questioned by the Judicial Committee. The
question remains, however, as to why that defence was never filed. Cabinet has
instructed the Ministry of Legal Affairs to make an urgent report on the
circumstances which led to the judgment in default in 1996.
However, the Law Lords indicated in their ruling that "the government was
playing fast and loose with the court and its procedures". It continued "time
and time again the government sought to frustrate the progress of the
proceedings". The government's release
confirms that cabinet has also instructed the Ministry of Legal Affairs to set
up a Review Panel comprising senior law officers and other public officers, to
make regular reports for submission to Cabinet on the status of all legal
matters, both potential and actual, which have been or might be brought by or
against government or any public officers. In
November, 2001, government filed a suit against Dipcon, claiming damages for
Dipcon's breach of contract. By order of the Court no further action was
taken, pending determination of Dipcon's claim against government. With the
appeal to the Judicial Committee now disposed of, the way is open to
government to proceed with its lawsuit against Dipcon. Cabinet has instructed
the Ministry of Legal Affairs to pursue this matter with all possible vigour.
Back...
Most popular
articles: viewed, printed and e-mailed
Printable
version
| 
