By Sue-Ann Wayow

EASTMAN Enterprises Ltd has lost its appeal to have its Community-based Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme Company (CEPEP) contract heard as an urgent basis.
The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on Wednesday.

Justice Nolan Bereaux, in delivering the ruling, said the case did not demonstrate the level of urgency required to be prioritised ahead of other matters before the court.

The application stemmed from a High Court decision by Justice Margaret Mohammed, who dismissed Eastman’s bid for an injunction to compel CEPEP to reinstate its contract which was terminated in June, and referred the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to consider whether a criminal investigation was warranted.

Eastman citing hardship by the terminated workers is being represented by attorney Larry Lalla, SC, Kareem Marcelle and St Clair O’Neil.

Attorney Anand Ramlogan, SC appeared with Kent Samlal, Jared Jagroo and Asha Ramlal for the CEPEP Company Limited.
Ramlogan argued that Eastman benefitted millions from CEPEP and other companies and should encourage their workers to seek employment elsewhere.

The substantive appeal will come up for hearing in the usual manner.

Justice Bereaux ruled there were no cogent circumstances that would allow the appeal to be heard over, above and in priority to other matters before the Court in which other persons have been patiently waiting in the queue and ordered Eastman to pay CEPEP’s legal costs.

CEPEP issued a release subsequently detailing the court matter.
The company stated, “CEPEP was based on a business incubator model, and contractors were not entitled to take advantage by converting that into a form of permanent employment that could deprive other persons of the opportunity to work under CEPEP’s programme, he (Ramlogan) submitted.”

On Wednesday evening, Public Relations Officer of the People’s National Movement (PNM) Faris Al-Rawi contended that CEPEP’s press release was misleading to the public.
He stated, “The attorneys have cautioned that the CEPEP press release seeks to deliberately mislead the population as to the ruling and proceedings before the Court of Appeal involving Eastman Enterprises Ltd.

The said release under the hand of Mr Keith Eddy, CEO of CEPEP, seems to be a release straight from the propaganda machinery of a political party rather than a State Agency ran with taxpayers’ monies.”

According to Al-Rawi’s information, on August 14, Eastman Enterprises Ltd filed a Notice of Procedural Appeal thereby appealing the decision/ orders of the High Court.

“A procedural appeal hearing is usually heard within 56 days of the filing of the appeal. However, during the court’s vacation, the time does not run. This means that the appeal would be heard on/or before October 27, 2025,” he stated.

On August 15, Eastman filed an application for the appeal to be expedited – to get an earlier appeal hearing during the court’s vacation and the matter was called at 10 am on Wednesday to determine whether the circumstances of the case warranted the hearing during the court’s vacation.

Al-Rawi stated, “The Court, in its balancing act, determined that Eastman’s application for an earlier hearing during the Court’s vacation did not fall within exceptional circumstances and that an earlier hearing in September, 2025 can still be possible without bringing the Court out from its vacation to treat with matter. The said application for an earlier hearing only was dismissed.”

He also stated, “CEPEP made an application for an order for legal costs which was rejected by the Court of Appeal. Instead, the Court of Appeal ordered that the costs of the application be dealt with in cause. This simply means that the issue of costs would be dealt with when the entire appeal is determined. (Only if the respondent succeeds in the substantive appeal will the respondent get an order for costs relative this application).”
Lalla has informed that Eastman was ready and committed to prosecuting its substantive appeal on/or before October 27, 2025, Al-Rawi added.