Supreme Court Will Determine Quantum of Damages
The ruling by the C.C.J. was grounded on equitable treatment since for over twenty years the receipts went into an escrow account rather than directly into the consolidated revenue fund and for over twenty years, the government had no complaints since they received all the money they were entitled to. Attorney General Michael Peyrefitte, this afternoon provided comments on the ruling by the C.C.J. which used very strong language on the government’s high handedness. But while he took a different approach from PM Barrow’s “can’t pay, won’t pay;” Peyrefitte says it will take time for the Supreme Court to determine the quantum of damages. In the meantime, interest would be accumulating.
Michael Peyrefitte, Attorney General
“We treat when it comes down in our favour the same as when it comes down against us because one, you can’t do anything about it. And two that’s how you train to deal with decisions like that professionally. So we are prepared for what it would mean if it came in our favour and what it would mean if it didn’t come in our favour. So when it came down it is just a matter of dealing with whatever is said by the judgment.”
Michael Peyrefitte
Reporter
“But the prime minister has said we can’t pay.”
Michael Peyrefitte
“Well the C.C.J. has said that there is nothing to pay at this point. They sent the matter back to the Supreme Court for the Supreme Court to determine the amount that we should pay. So that amount hasn’t been determined yet. So even if we wanted to pay now, how much yo pay. Even if we wanted to move now…we have to pay because we are bound by the judgment. That’s the judgment and we will have to pay. The question is when and that when is determined by how much and how much is determined by how long the Supreme Court will take to determine that amount and then there could be an appeal of that and then there could be an appeal of that back to the C.C.J. So if you think about it going all the way back to the C.C.J. to determine an amount, it could very well be another year before you get an actual figure as to how much you should pay.”
Reporter
“Are you disappointed at the ruling given the lower courts’ rulings?”
Michael Peyrefitte
“I am disappointed at the ruling because of the law not just necessarily because of the lower courts’ ruling. I believe the law is clear. I don’t know how you can say that a contract is illegal, but at the same time there is a breach of it. How can you breach something that is illegal?”
