High Court Dismisses Application by SFXCU Board

An application for judicial review of the appointment of an administrator at Saint Francis Xavier Credit Union Limited, filed on behalf of the board of directors and general manager, has been dismissed by the High Court.  Earlier today, Justice Martha Alexander handed down a decision in the matter that was lodged in the Senior Courts of Belize in April 2023.  Executives of the lending institution have been at odds with the Registrar of Credit Unions since a decision was taken last year to assign a manager to oversee the day-to-day operations of SFXCU.  They then sought a declaration from the court that the decision of the Registrar of Credit Unions was unlawful and that the appointment be quashed.  In refusing to consider the claimants’ request, Justice Alexander made several determinations, as explained by Senior Counsel Andrew Marshalleck.

 

Andrew Marshalleck, SC, Attorney-at-law

“As you are aware there was a challenge to the appointment of an administrator by the Registrar of Credit Unions over the St. Francis Xavier Credit Union.  That was done because he had expressed the view that given certain administrative and other problems, the stability of the credit union was at risk and he thought that he needed to appoint an administrator to take over management and to put matters right in order to safeguard the interests of members of the credit union.  That decision was challenged on a number of bases, most of which failed.  The decision this morning, first off, the judge confirmed that Section 61:1 of the credit union act which empowers the registrar to appoint an administrator, does not require that there be liquidity or financial problems before the appointment is made and it’s a, when you think about it, a common sense approach because even before there were liquidity or financial problems the registrar should be able to intervene in order to prevent the liquidity or financial problems.  That‘s part of his function, part of his role.  So where he sees that things are being managed in such a way that they were headed in a wrong path, he can intervene to set them right.  So the section was interpreted by the court to allow for that, that the three separate limbs or bases on which you can, the registrar can intervene to appoint an administrator, the first of which is that there are liquidity problems, second of which are other financial problems and then a third, more general, is administrative or other problems that jeopardizes the stability of the credit union.  It was on that third limb that the registrar acted in this case and the court also went on to find that the appointment was reasonable, having regards to the investigative reports, examinations and other correspondents that was before the court, that the registrar was perfectly entitled in those circumstances to invoke Section 61:1 to appoint an administrator.”