Jagdeo files application to set aside $20m judgment to Ferguson
Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo yesterday filed an urgent application seeking to set aside the default judgment ordering him to pay former government minister Annette Ferguson $20M, owing to his failure to file a defence on time in a libel action she brought against him.
The application was emailed to the media by now Attorney General Anil Nandlall who had been Jagdeo’s lawyer when the action was brought against him last January in his private capacity. He was Leader of the Opposition then.
Nandlall was appointed AG on August 2nd, 2020 after the PPP/C was declared winners of the March 2nd, 2020 polls.
Earlier this week, following service of the order on Jagdeo, Nandlall had issued a statement signaling his intention to challenge the order.
He has since come in for strong criticism from Ferguson for making public statements on the matter between two private citizens; especially since he now holds the office of Attorney General and is to only represent the government’s interest before the courts.
In the application to-set-aside, Devindra Kissoon is on record as being Jagdeo’s lawyer.
In his application, Jagdeo is seeking to have the March 11th, order set aside in its entirety and also an order dismissing Ferguson’s “Statement of Claim for delay.”
However, in the alternative, he is asking for an order allowing him to file his defence within seven days of the granting of his application, and extending the relevant case management timelines to allow him to “properly defend the claim.”
On March 11th, Justice Sandra Kurtzious granted Ferguson (the Claimant) a judgment ‘in default of defence’ after Jagdeo failed to file his defence within the 28-day time period specified in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
Justice Kurtzious noted that the default judgment was being made against Jagdeo in accordance with Part 12:01 (2) (d) of the CPR. The cause she noted, is Jagdeo’s failure to file his defence within the time required.
Annette Ferguson
The Order made by the judge notes that having read Ferguson’s application and evidence adduced by her attorney, the Court made the judgment against Jagdeo to the tune of $20,000,000.
Justice Kurtzious also granted Ferguson costs in the sum of $75,000 which has to be borne by Jagdeo as well.
Bharrat Jagdeo
The court Order goes on to specify that failure to comply with the judgment will amount to contempt of court for which the defendant may be liable to imprisonment or have his assets confiscated.
Following the court order being served
on Jagdeo on Tuesday, Nandlall issued a press release saying on the one hand that he was unaware of the default judgment, but on the other, attributing his failure to submit his client’s defence on time, to his preparations for the March 2nd, 2020 General elections.
Ferguson on Wednesday, however, defended the High Court order.
Her statement, in part, said that, the claim by Nandlall that the judgment was granted without the knowledge of Mr. Jagdeo and his Attorneys-at-Law and in their absence “is furthest from the truth and a deflection from what occurred.
“The matter before the Court is between two Citizens in their private capacities and therefore it will be expected that Mr Nandlall would have eschewed any role in speaking on this matter and would have advised Mr Jagdeo to seek Counsel in Private practice,” her statement continued. “…now that a judgment has been granted, I wish to reiterate, that the statements which were made against me are patently false, and the ruling of the court has vindicated me,” she also asserted.
“The ruling of the court is in order, in that, it reinforces the need for persons, irrespective of what office they hold to be responsible and not reckless in their utterances,” the former minister further noted.
In his application Jagdeo is asking for an interim order staying the enforcement of Justice Kurtzious’ judgment pending the hearing and determination of his challenge. He also wants court costs and any further order the court deems just to grant.
Among other things, Jagdeo argues that though the order for default judgment was served on him on Tuesday, to date it has not been served on his then counsel or even his former office.
He contends, too, that since no action was taken by Ferguson between January 9th, 2020 and February 24th, 2021, the “matter ought to have been dismissed for delay in accordance with the mandatory provisions of CPR Part 13, and accordingly, in the circumstances, the issuance of the Order was improper and irregular.”
“For this reason alone, it is respectfully submitted that the Order ought to be set aside and the Statement of Claim dismissed,” Jagdeo says.
Apart from that, however, he said that Ferguson has failed to fulfill the requirements necessary for the grant of a default judgment.
On this point he said that Ferguson failed to alert the court that she has filed identical parallel proceedings against the Guyana Times which seeks damages against that newspaper arising out of the identical comments.
According to him, not only would that matter have been relevant to the court concerning the assessment of damages, but as a matter of law, the filing of two defamation matters arising out of the same facts and circumstances is improper and impermissible.
Ferguson had filed a $60M lawsuit against
Jagdeo—and the
Guyana Times, over what she said were libellous statements made by the two, calculated to damage her character and reputation.
The matters were conducted separately. The action against the
Guyana Times is still pending.
In her suit against Jagdeo, Ferguson was seeking damages in excess of $50,000,000 for libel she said he committed on two separate occasions—December 5th and 12th of 2019 for which she was asking for more than $25M in damages for each occasion.
Meanwhile, as regards the libellous statements she said were published by the Guyana Times, the former Minister is seeking damages in excess of $10M.
Ferguson, through her attorney Lyndon Amsterdam had alleged that Jagdeo had made what she said were untrue statements regarding her acquisition of land.
In an interview with this newspaper last year following one of the hearings, Amsterdam had said that he had submitted to the court all relevant documents substantiating that his client owned a single property on only one plot of land, and not three house lots as was disseminated by the defendants.
He had said, too, that contrary to statements made suggesting that his client suddenly came into wealth after becoming a government minister in 2015, her financial records of income have been submitted to the court substantiating her income way before 2015.
The lawyer had said that in fact, his client had been able to secure a bank loan which she used to acquire the only house she owns at Eccles, East Bank Demerara for which she has legally been given title.