State-owned Petrotrin has failed in its bid to bring a lawsuit against the Minister of Labour and Small Enterprise Development Jennifer Baptiste-Primus and the Registrar of the Industrial Court.
On Tuesday, Petrotrin’s lawyers filed a judicial review lawsuit in which they claimed both parties had acted unreasonably in registering a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) signed between itself and the Oilfields Workers’ Trade Union (OWTU) in April.
However, during a preliminary hearing on the case in the Port-of-Spain High Court yesterday afternoon, High Court Judge Carol Gobin refused the company leave to pursue the claim.
The OWTU was not named as a party to the proceedings but was still allowed by Gobin to present submissions.
In a press release yesterday evening, the OWTU described Gobin’s decision as an important legal victory and accused the company of using the lawsuit to delay the hearing of its industrial relations offence against it.
The MOA is at the centre of the OWTU’s case being heard by the Industrial Court this week. Yesterday’s hearing in that matter was adjourned after a judge fell ill.
In the offence complaint, the OWTU is alleging Petrotrin breached the MoA by deciding to shut its operations without consulting with the union first. In addition to a $4,000 fine, the union is seeking an order compelling the company to postpone its planned closure on November 30 and return to the negotiation table.
In its failed lawsuit, the company was claiming the minister’s delegates within the ministry only had the power to refer the document to the Industrial Court if it dealt with a trade dispute between the parties.
Petrotrin noted that there was no dispute between it and the OWTU and the MoA was merely meant to record a commitment and agreement between the parties over the urgent need to restructure the company.
“Further, the Minister’s delegate acted contrary to the principles of fairness by failing to inform and/or consult with and/or allow the applicant to make representations prior to forwarding the MoA to the Court,” Petrotrin’s lawyers stated, as they claimed it was the union that requested that the document be sent on June 4.
The lawyers alleged that the Industrial Court Registrar “committed a wrongful act or acted in dereliction of duty” by failing to recognise the issues with the registration when it was done on July 20.
Petrotrin is also complaining it was only informed of the registration a day before the union filed for the offence earlier this month.
The company claimed the registrar’s actions led to them being in an unexpected and disadvantageous position in the ongoing proceedings.
Petrotrin also admitted the case was filed late, as it should have been done within three months of the offending decision. However, it asked for an extension of the limit as it pointed out that it was only informed of it earlier this month and its lawyers were preoccupied with the proceedings before the Industrial Court.
Through the lawsuit, Petrotrin was seeking declarations that both parties acted unlawfully and orders quashing their respective decisions.
Petrotrin is being represented by Reginald Armour, SC, Vanessa Gopaul, Marcelle Ferdinand and Raphael Ajodhia. The union is being represented by Douglas Mendes, SC.