Novelo brothers claim victory in court
Their names are synonymous to the bus industry and since February of this year, they have been running into plenty of problems. And while it wasn’t a knockout victory for the Novelo brothers, the ruling today of Justice Samuel Awich has given them enough reason to proceed to the next round of legal battle with the Transport Department and Chief Transport Officer, Candelaria Zaldivar. The trial took place in November and today Justice Awich ruled in favor of six different applications made by Attorney Lisa Shoman, for her clients, David Novelo, National Transports Limited, Guinea Grass Transports, Ladyville Transports and Hattieville Transports. The claimants sought and won judicial review of the road service permits issued by the Transport Board on October nineteenth. Justice Awich granted judicial review on the claimant’s point that they were never given a chance to attend and make representation at any of the Transport Board’s meetings prior to the granting of permits. He also allowed ground for judicial review of the newly introduced zoning policy to determine if it has created a limited or exclusive concession that needed to be taken to the National Assembly before implementation.
On the issue of the appointment of Leo Batty and John Flowers to the Transport Board, Justice Awich also granted permission for judicial review since both are former members of the previous Novelo’s Receivership team. The ruling was encouraging for Shoman’s client, Chief Executive Officer of National Transports, David Novelo.
Lisa Shoman, Attorney for Novelo’s
“On many of the grounds on which we brought the matter for judicial review have been allowed including the entire issue of whether the policy was a policy that fell within the ambit of the law. One of the things that judge was very clear on was that yes, Ministers have the power to make policy but that policy has to fall within the four corners of the law. So one of the grounds on which we have been granted leave for judicial review would be to see whether by following this policy and by granting certain concessions to bus owners, the law that a limited concession or exclusive concession on the other hand has to be taken to the National Assembly, that will be ordered in court. As well, whether the Transport Board acted properly or improperly in the considerations that they made, for instance, not gazetting their meetings, never giving the claimants the opportunity to be heard in those meetings, whether in fact that would make void the decisions that they made in terms of the grant of the licenses in this case.”
David Novelo, C.E.O., Nat’l Transports Ltd.
“We’re in here for the long haul and we’re gonna pursue this case especially for all the people that their jobs depend on it as well and as well for the communities. As you know, recently I’ve been watching some of your newscasts in terms of zoning and we know that zoning is really not the right process of having a quality transport system and we hope that at the end of the day that the court will rule positively and most importantly, that the Department of Transport will do the right stuff in terms of making sure we deal with the transportation industry in a more holistic way that will benefit the commuters.”
Lisa Shoman
“As any attorney will tell you, we’d have liked to have seen all of the orders that we prayed for, but in fact the judge did state that until final determination of this order, the matter of issuance of permits in the remainder of the Northern Zone—that is everything except the Ladyville runs which have been dealt with—we have gotten an interim injunction on that. And so the issue of interim injunctions in the north at this point, according to the judge, has been granted.”
Marion Ali
“Which of those injunctions that you did not get would have been key for you?”
Lisa Shoman
“I think having a look at the status that occurred before October the eighteenth and that would mean the Western and the Southern Zones. In particular, for instance, the Southern Zone in which my clients have been granted no runs at all despite the fact that they had applied, they were never given any opportunity to either state how they could fulfil those runs, what service they could have given. None of that was ever done. That would have been good but remember, the fact that you have not been granted an interim injunction, does not mean that if the claimants succeed in this matter, then the matter of damages will then need to be looked at. So therefore, in not granting the interim injunctions, of course, if damages continue to flow and damages can be proven, then the government will be liable to pay those damages if the court finds that the Transport Board as a matter of fact, has done or has allowed these permits to be issued in an unlawful manner.”
While the Novelos are encouraged by the ruling, Shoman says it is a clear message to government that the court can intercede where irregular decisions are deemed to have been made.
Lisa Shoman
“There is always an imbalance between the citizen and the government. The government is seen to be all powerful but the rule of law means that even the government is subject to the law and to the courts and that the courts will absolutely review the actions of a government through its authorities to see whether that was done lawfully or unlawfully and if it is unlawful and damages have to be paid, then government will have to pay those damages.”
When the case is heard in the first quarter of 2009, the claimants will argue that the new permits issued were unlawful and that they suffered losses because of those wrongful permits. If Shoman can prove these key points in court, then the Transport Boards would then have to reissue permits. Meanwhile, Novelo says the Transport Department’s recent decisions have placed his family’s investments of around eleven million dollars at risk. Lois Young, Attorney for the Transport Department, and the Chief Transport Officer, was not available for comment following the ruling.
