Nandlall says clients owed $1.7m by state

-writes Finance Minister

Attorney Anil Nandlall says that the Attorney General’s Chambers, headed by his successor Basil Williams SC, owes to his clients in excess of $1.7M for payment of court costs awarded in cases which he has won against him.

In a letter to Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, whose ministry Nandlall said is by law obligated to make the payments, he threatens court action, by way of initiating contempt proceedings unless the payments are made.

Nandlall says that all attempts so far to secure payment from the AG’s Chambers have proven futile, and as such he has decided to write Jordan, to whom he said he had initially spoken, concerning the matter.

Nandlall, a former Attorney General under the previous PPP/C administration has listed six cases, for which he said a total of $1.7M in cost is owed to his clients by the AG’s Chambers.

Among the cases he identified are Rawle Fitzgerald Miller Vs. the Attorney General and the Mahaica, Mahaicony, Abary-Agricultural Development Authority, in which acting Chief Justice Roxane George SC, granted Miller judgment, thereafter ordering the AG to pay cost in the sum of $300,000.

This order was made on December 11 of last year.

Four similar actions brought by Rupert Blackman, Philip Alexander and others, Joylyn Nicholson and others and Brian George and another also against the Attorney General and the Mahaica,Mahaicony, Abary-Agricultural Development Authority, saw the Chief Justice awarding $300,000 cost in each of those two cases as well.

Finally, according to the letter which Nandlall said he sent to Jordan and which was seen by Stabroek News, the AG’s Chambers also owes cost in the sum of $200,000 in the case of Rajendra Jaigobin Vs. the Attorney General.

Justice George, Nandlall explained in that correspondence, granted Jaigobin judgment on November 22, 2017.

Counsel said that an early settlement of the payments would be welcomed; as opposed to the course of contempt proceedings being adopted, which he noted can result in imprisonment of those responsible for ensuring the release of the cash to honour the court orders.

Around the Web