Two businesses owned by Tobago business magnate Allan Warner have lodged an application seeking permission from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to appeal their defeat in a bid for an injunction in an ongoing police investigation into mining operations at a Wallerfield plant.
Warns Quarry Company Ltd and Pres-T-Con’s application for permission to appeal was lodged in the Privy Council on March 28.
In November 2024, Justices of Appeal Mark Mohammed and Peter Rajkumar rejected the appeal by five of Warner’s companies, his son Aluko, and a group of employees and business associates against the Attorney General’s Office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
They contend Justice Frank Seepersad got it wrong when he refused the injunction on August 21, 2024. The injunction sought to have the police return multi-million-dollar quarry equipment and machinery.
The lawsuit before Seepersad was filed by five companies in the Warner Group – Warns Quarry Co Ltd, Warner Construction and Sanitation Ltd, Inez Investments Ltd, Pres-T-Con 2021 Ltd and Allcrete Ltd – and 12 individuals facing criminal charges.
>
In their ruling, the appellate judges said Seepersad’s ruling could not be faulted.
The judges said Seepersad correctly found there was an arguable case, and damages would be an adequate remedy if the group were eventually successful in its lawsuit.
They also rejected claims that the companies within the group would suffer irreparable harm or reputational damage if the injunction were not granted.
"Reputational damage could not be undone. It has not been demonstrated how, even with the injunction, the harm could have been prevented," Rajkumar said, as he noted much of the damage complained of was based on media reports on the police raids.
In deciding the procedural appeal, the Appeal Court noted Seepersad correctly balanced which party would suffer the greater prejudice in refusing the injunction and rejected claims that the search warrants interfered with the company's constitutional right to enjoyment of its property.
Rajkumar also noted that, from the evidence, the police were at the quarry to protect evidence, but did not prevent access and vacated two days after the injunction was refused.
"The situation with the real property no longer exists," Rajkumar said.
The judges also rejected a claim that Seepersad could be perceived as biased. "There was nothing read out to the court that demonstrates unconscious bias about ‘smartmen,’" he said. "To accuse him of bias is not fair."
In their original lawsuit, which remains pending, the group contended the police probe, which resulted in Warner and the others being charged, was unlawful and unconstitutional. Through the associated injunction application, they were seeking the return of heavy equipment, tools and communication devices that were seized by police officers during raids in December 2023 and in May 2024. They also sought the release of a 16.67-hectare parcel of land in Wallerfield commandeered by the police as part of their probe and the original documents seized from their offices. In the lawsuit, the group’s lawyers noted that Pres-T-Con obtained a 25-year lease from a company for the Wallerfield property in January 2022. Pres-T-Con granted permission to Warns Quarry to occupy the property, and the latter was granted a licence from the Commissioner of State Lands.
>
They noted that the Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries granted Warns Quarry a conditional authorisation to undertake mineral processing at the property until the end of 2025.
Warner, his son, and seven employees and associates were charged with processing aggregate without a licence under Section 45(1)(a) of the Minerals Act. The group, which has denied any wrongdoing, faces a $200,000 fine and two years' imprisonment if convicted.
Farai Hove Maisasai, Christopher George and Chelsea Edwards represent the group.
