Port Authority ordered to pay $8.5M to car dealer

A High Court judge has ordered the Port Authority (PATT) to pay Claxton Bay vehicle dealer A&M Marketing Ltd a total of $8.5 million as well as to return in 28 days 185 imported vehicles it impounded in 2015.

Justice Kevin Ramcharan made the order in the San Fernando High Court on Friday in a claim filed by A&M Marketing for wrongful detention of its vehicles.

The judge was critical of the Port Authority for failing to disclose that A&M Marketing had originally been granted a partial waiver of store rent fees. This was subsequently overturned after former manager Charmaine Lewis intervened.

The dealership took the authority to court in September for breach of a settlement agreement and compensation for wrongful detention of its 185 vehicles as the PATT refused to release the vehicles, claiming the company was owing store rent fees in excess of $16 million.

A&M Marketing, through its lawyer Anand Ramlogan, SC, argued that the fees had been waived as a result of a settlement agreement that included the waiver.

Also appearing for A&M were Jayanti Lutchmedial and Alana Rambaran. PATT was represented by Kendall Alexander, Aisha Donawa, Nikesha Charles and Louise Peters.

The dealer’s troubles began in 2014 when it applied for import licences from the then Ministry of Trade, Investments, Industry and Communications to facilitate the importation of 185 right-hand drive vehicles from Japan.

The TT Automotive Dealers Association had, however, challenged the ministry’s decision to implement a new policy for the importation of fully assembled right-hand-drive foreign-used cars, leading to the ministry stopping the grant of new import licences pending the conclusion of the case.

A&M’s vehicles, however, had already shipped and arrived on the port. A&M’s general manager Fareez Balladin gave evidence that it was not unusual for the ministry to grant import licences after vehicles had landed, owing to bureaucratic red tape. He cited many examples of this happening in the past.

The association’s case was dismissed in 2014 and the ministry granted affected importers retroactive import licences.

However, since vehicles were sitting on the port while the association’s case was being determined, store rent charges had accrued. The PATT, therefore, refused to release the vehicles unless the rent charges were paid.

A&M sought a waiver of the charges, saying it was not at fault as the ministry was the cause of the delay.

Under cross-examination, Ricardo Gonzales, divisional manager of the PATT admitted that a partial waiver had been granted to A&M, but the decision had been revoked on the instruction of then general manager Lewis.

The minutes of PATT committee meetings recorded the reason for the refusal to grant the waiver as a lack of clarity of the explanation given by the ministry and its acceptance of responsibility for the delay in granting the licence.

Ramcharan said he could not see what clarification PATT needed, since the ministry admitted it was responsible for the delay. A threat by A&M to file for judicial review led to PATT agreeing to waive all the store rent charges and settle the matter amicably.

The offer was accepted by A&M, but the new PATT board subsequently refused to honour it, leading the dealer to file a new lawsuit to enforce the agreement. In his ruling, Ramcharan held that it was clear the general manager was acting on behalf of the PATT and had the authority to do so, which resulted in a binding settlement agreement.