CCJ Dismisses Appeal in Wilfred Elrington Vs Progresso Heights Limited

Today, the Caribbean Court of Justice handed down a ruling upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision in the matter between former Minister of Foreign Affairs Wilfred Elrington and Progresso Heights Limited. Just over a decade ago, Elrington as a shareholder in Progresso Heights Limited, visited the Lands Department and filed cautions on one hundred parcels of land that the directors were attempting to sell. This is after Elrington and the directors had a falling out. Progresso Heights Limited then brought a lawsuit against Elrington to have the cautions lifted. In 2019, the High Court ruled in favor of Progresso Heights Limited and awarded them over three hundred thousand dollars in damages. Elrington then appealed the matter at the Court of Appeal. The appeal was dismissed and the order of the trial judge was affirmed. Elrington then took the matter to the Caribbean Court of Justice to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.   The CCJ came to the conclusion that there was no need to interfere with the decision of the Court of Appeal.  Here is that decision.

 

Justice Maureen Rajnauth- Lee, Caribbean Court of Justice

“The court held that there was no reason to interfere with the view expressed by the Court of Appeal, that the question of whether the claim was legitimately brought by the company did not arise on the pleadings and was therefore not an issue. It has not been disputed that that issue was never raised in the appellant’s defense. In addition, the appellant did not seek to strike out the claim brought by the company. Further, the appellant did not seek to appeal the trial judge’s ruling, granting the company application to permit Mr. L Schneider’s evidence to be given at the trial by video link, even though the trial judge had accepted by that ruling Mr. L Schneider had the requisite authority to make that witness statement. The court also observed that the appellant made no application to amend his defense to ledge that the company’s claim had been brought without the requisite authority despite the strong objections by counsel for the company during the cross examination of Mr. L Schneider on that issue. Following these judgments, the appeal was dismissed, the orders of the Court of Appeal was affirmed and it was ordered that the appellant pay to the respondent cost of this appeal as agreed to by the parties.”