Allan Warner loses lawsuit linked to mining probe

Senior Reporter

derek.achong@guardian.co.tt

A group of businesses owned by Tobago business magnate Allan Warner have lost their bid for the release of heavy equipment and a property that was seized by the police as part of an investigation into their mining operation.

Delivering a written decision yesterday morning, High Court Judge Frank Seepersad dismissed the injunction application brought by five of Warner’s companies, his son Aluko, and a group of employees and business associates against the Attorney General’s Office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Justice Seepersad said some of the items that were seized by the police in May were returned while he was weighing in on the application. He noted that the remaining equipment could not be released because they are the evidence in ongoing criminal proceedings against Warner, his son, and their employees and associates.

Justice Seepersad said: “A constitutional court must act with caution and should not pre-empt any legitimate investigative process nor should it interfere with the reasonable and or rational exercise of the investigative and prosecutorial discretion.”

He said the companies and their associates did not prove any exceptional circumstances to warrant such an interference.

He pointed out that separate applications for the release of the remaining items had been made before the judicial officer hearing the criminal case against the group.

“The Court notes that where alternative remedies are available, caution should be exercised and a constitutional claim only be maintained where there exists special features which justify the invocation of the Court’s constitutional jurisdiction,” he said.

Justice Seepersad also said the group could be compensated for their loss of use of the equipment if they are successful in defending the criminal charges.

“The Court does appreciate that economic loss may be occasioned to the claimants as use of and access to equipment is curtailed but the claimants can be adequately compensated in damages if the charges are eventually dismissed and they are able to establish that they were maliciously prosecuted and claims in detinue and conversion can also be instituted,” he said.

The claimants in the case are Warns Quarry Company Ltd, Warner Construction and Sanitation Ltd, Inez Investments Ltd, Pres-T-Con 2021 Ltd, Allcrete Ltd, Warner’s son Aluko, employees Robert Wilson, Ricky Joseph, Corey Charles, Kimal Williams, Willinsque Tobias, and Shastri Madhoo and independent contractors Rueben Maprangala, Deon George, Rudy Sahai, Aaron Neptune, and Ahmeed David.

The group filed a lawsuit contending that an ongoing police probe, which resulted in the individuals and Warner being charged with engaging in illegal quarrying, was unlawful and unconstitutional.

Through the associated injunction application, they were seeking the return of heavy equipment, tools and communication devices that were seized by police officers during raids last December and in May, as well as the release of a 16.67 hectare parcel of land in Wallerfield that was commandeered by the police as part of their probe.

In the lawsuit, the group’s lawyers led by Farai Hove-Masaisai noted that Pres-T-Con obtained a 25-year lease from a company for the Wallerfield property in January 2022.

Pres-T-Con granted permission to Warns Quarry to occupy the property and the latter was granted a licence from the Commissioner of State Lands on May 20.

They noted that on June 18, the Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries granted Warns Quarry a conditional authorisation to undertake mineral processing at the property until the end of next year.

Justice Seepersad noted that under the licence and conditional authorisation, the companies did not have exclusive possession of the property, which is on State land.

He also noted that the licence and authorisation did not give permission for mining activity which allegedly occurred before they were granted.

However, Justice Seepersad noted that the companies should not be further prevented from utilising areas of the property that do not form part of the ongoing probe, in accordance with the approvals they received.

“The evidence has not established that there exists any justification to impose restrictions on those rights provided that the exercise of these rights do not interfere with the items and equipment which are currently the subject of the investigation,” he said.

He did note that he could not order the police to vacate the portions still under probe as there was no evidence they acted oppressively and unreasonably.

Justice Seepersad warned that the remaining investigation should be swiftly completed.

Warner, his son, and seven employees and associates, who were charged with processing aggregate without a licence under Section 45(1)(a) of the Minerals Act, are expected to reappear in court on September 27.

The group, which has denied any wrongdoing, faces a $200,000 fine and imprisonment for two years if they are eventually convicted.

The companies and individuals were also represented by Chelsea Edwards, of Hove and Associates. The AG’s Office was represented by Jason Mootoo, SC, and Tamara Toolsie, while Ian Benjamin, SC, Tekiyah Jorsling and Vincent Jardine represented the DPP’s Office.

The post Allan Warner loses lawsuit linked to mining probe first appeared on CNC3.