By Alicia Chamely
FORMER Community Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme (CEPEP) contractor Eastman Enterprises is to pay two-thirds of CEPEP’s legal fees as ordered by the Court of Appeal.
In a press release on Monday, CEPEP announced the Court of Appeal’s ruling of compensation, stating, “The Court of Appeal has ordered CEPEP Contractor Eastman Enterprises Limited to pay CEPEP’s legal costs in their recently concluded appeal, in which the Court ruled that the Contractor was wrong to bypass the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) clause in the contract by filing a claim in the Courts.”
Eastman first took CEPEP to court following the April 28th General Election.
Eastman’s contract was terminated on June 7, despite an addendum signed on April 23, which extended the contract to September 2029 and sought compensation and reinstatement of his contract.
The case was heard by Justice Mohammed on August 27, where Mohammed ruled a stay on proceedings based on Eastman’s failure to adhere to the ADR process in clause 17 as outlined in their contract with CEPEP.
Further, with CEPEP’s legal team alleged that Eastman secured his April 23 contract and extension based on “fraudulent misrepresentation” of Cabinet approval, when no such approval was granted, Mohammed ordered all documentation to be referred to the DPP for his consideration.
Eastman’s attorneys moved to have the Mohammed’s ruling appealed at the Court of Appeal, where Justices of Appeal Peter Rajkumar, James Aboud and Ricky Rahim ruled that Eastman was obligated to comply with the contract’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR) clause before bringing legal proceedings against CEPEP, upholding High Court Justice Margaret Mohammed’s decision to stay the claim.
On Monday, the court ruled Eastman pay two thirds of CEPEP’s legal costs, with one third and a “minor discount of 20%” for the reversal of the reference of the DPP.
The judgment read, “In those circumstances there is no reason i] to depart from the usual order that costs follow the event, and ii] to recognize that the successful party on appeal, who would be entitled to costs on the main issue or event, was the respondent. That was because the appellant was not successful in reversing the order of the Trial Judge staying the proceedings.”
Considering the ruling, CEPEP stated, “CEPEP therefore calls upon Contractors to abide by the terms of their contracts with CEPEP; and is committed to upholding the rule of law in relation to its conduct of business.”
CEPEP was represented by Anand Ramlogan, Senior Council, Jared Jagroo and Asha Ramlal.
Eastman was represented by Larry Lalla, Senior Council, St Clair O’Niel and Kareem Marcelle.
