The Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) has been ordered to compensate a San Juan businessman after a High Court ruling found the utility liable for negligence and nuisance over a sewage disaster that forced his business to close for 45 days.
Justice Frank Seepersad, in a scathing judgment on March 6, warned that ageing and failing sewer mains across Trinidad and Tobago pose a serious public health risk, describing them as a “ticking sewer bomb” that could lead to environmental and sanitary crises if not urgently addressed.
“Repair and/ or replacement of sewer mains is an integral part of maintenance and it is difficult to comprehend why the entirety of this main, which has exceeded its life time, was not replaced.
“The area served by this sewer main is an important artery along the East/West corridor and the court is filled with a feeling of dread as this main may be a ticking sewer bomb and presents a clear and present danger.
“WASA cannot be an acronym for ‘wavering, apathetic, supine or atrophic,’ instead it must stand for an approach which is wilful, attentive, strategic and alert.
>
“This scenario does not auger well for the condition of the sewer mains in the republic’s main cities and proactive action is required,” the judge said.
He suggested WASA “as a matter of urgency,” comprehensively review TT’s sewer systems and aged mains “to avert an impending health and environmental crisis.”
Seepersad’s criticisms and suggestions came in his ruling in favour of business owner Matthew Edwards, trading as Sure Bros Enterprises, who alleged negligence by WASA led to significant financial losses and property damage.
The authority is now expected to compensate Edwards assessed by a master of the High Court.
Attorneys Javier Forrester and Kern Edwards of the Legal Aid and Advisory Authority (LAAA) represented Edwards. Kirk Bengochea represented WASA at last week’s trial.
Edwards’s lawsuit stemmed from an issue on October 27, 2021, when he noticed water flooding his business at No 41 Eastern Main Road, Petit Bourg.
That day, raw sewage gushed into the premises, covering three-quarters of the floor and reaching five inches in height. The foul stench forced the immediate closure of his electronics, books, and ice cream business.
Despite numerous complaints to WASA by Edwards and his landlord, WASA failed to respond in a timely manner, leaving sewage flowing unchecked for over six weeks. During this period, Edwards made 42 phone calls to WASA, but workers only arrived on December 10, 2021, to repair the sewer main.
>
In his ruling, Seepersad noted the leak took 45 days to repair. He said it was “ reasonably foreseeable that the failure to repair the sewer main in a timely manner would result in continued sewage overflow, back up, flooding and damage.
“Public health and safety must always be a paramount consideration and it is difficult to understand why a more proactive approach was not adopted with respect to the maintenance and repair of WASA’s sewer mains.”
In its defence, WASA attempted to defend its inaction by citing a lack of resources and competing emergencies.
However, Seepersad firmly rejected this excuse, saying, “If such a position were to be accepted, then this republic should be classified as a failed state…
“While there is institutional dysfunction and the society seems to be at the edge of a precipitous slope, the court is unable to accept that all hope is lost and it cannot conclude that the resources of WASA were so taxed that it was unable to abate the flow of sewage in an urban centre for 45 days.”
In analysing the evidence, Seepersad noted the collapsed sewer main was over 80 years old—long past its expected lifespan. WASA’s sewer systems manager Terron Cobham admitted that high population growth in the area had placed additional pressure on the system, making a failure inevitable.
Seepersad ruled that WASA’s failure to properly maintain and repair the sewer main amounted to negligence. He also found the authority liable for creating a public nuisance, as the uncontrolled sewage leak not only destroyed property but posed serious health risks.
“On the operative factual matrix before this court, the standard of care taken by WASA was wanting…
“WASA ought to have replaced or repaired the sewer main given its age and the volume of waste which it facilitated, however, the sewer main was not properly maintained.
>
“Reasonable maintenance was part of the standard of care expected of WASA and the authority had an obligation to mitigate the foreseeable risk that an operational sewerage main which exceeded its life span could collapse and cause chaos.”
The judge noted that sewage is a dangerous and noxious substance, and WASA’s failure to prevent the leak and immediately remediate the situation was unacceptable.
Seepersad also ruled that WASA breached its statutory duty under the Water and Sewerage Act by failing to maintain and repair the ageing sewer main, which ultimately collapsed due to its deteriorating condition.
“WASA has a statutory duty with respect to sewer mains…” he said.
Because of the events that led to him having to close his business which halted his earnings for nearly two years, Edwards was forced to sell his assets, including his car, to pay off his debts. He approached the LAAA for representation.
The Legal Aid and Advice Act allows the authority to defend an applicant after assessing their income and assets over 12 months to determine eligibility.
If an individual’s income is below $36,000 and assets under $20,000, they qualify.
