Lawyers representing the Public Services Association (PSA) have made another bid to discharge an ongoing injunction freezing its assets and a corresponding application for it to be held in contempt of court.
Presenting submissions during a virtual hearing before Justice Devindra Rampersad yesterday afternoon, the PSA’s lawyer Rajiv Persad claimed the five PSA members who obtained the injunction from High Court Judge Frank Seepersad in late December should not be allowed to pursue the application to hold the organisation in contempt.
Persad claimed that while the five members are contending that his client breached a series of court orders granted by Justice Rampersad in early 2020 in a lawsuit over the trade union’s handling of elections for representatives of its various sections, they failed to notify the union of its alleged breaches before filing the application as required.
Questioning the timing of the application, Persad noted that it was filed almost two years and nine months after Justice Rampersad issued the orders.
“It must be served within a sufficient time to allow them to comply,” Persad said, as he pointed out that the PSA officials named in the initial lawsuit, including former president Watson Duke, no longer hold positions in the organisation.
Persad also claimed that the members, Curtis Cuffie, Demetrius Harrison, Annisha Persad, Curtis Meade, and Duaine Hewitt, failed to identify specific instances in which they allege the union breached Justice Rampersad’s orders.
He suggested that his client attempted to comply but was hampered by numerous issues outside its control.
Dealing with the injunction, which only allows the PSA to pay salaries and expenses related to its operation, Persad noted that his client needed some assistance with the interpretation despite being generally compliant.
“We want a balance to be struck to allow the organisation to operate. There are urgent matters which the union has to deal with,” he said.
Responding to the submissions, attorney Raisa Caesar called on Justice Rampersad to keep the injunction in place pending his determination of the contempt application.
She suggested that the change in the executive of the union did not justify the alleged non-compliance.
“It was a continuing breach starting with the previous executive and moving on with the new,” she said.
Caesar also rejected complaints about her clients’ perceived delay in bringing the contempt and injunction applications. She claimed that her clients gave the PSA time to abide by Justice Rampersad’s orders but were forced to intervene due to persistent non-compliance and the perceived dissipation of assets.
“We see dissipation being a real issue,” she said.
After hearing the submissions, Justice Rampersad promised to deliver his decision on the PSA’s preliminary objections on Wednesday afternoon.
In applying for the injunction, the group of members claimed that if not granted, the PSA and its current executive would deprive unrepresented sections of their rights under the organisation’s constitution and would continue to dissipate assets.
Under the injunction, which was eventually granted by Justice Seepersad, the defendants were prevented from disposing of or dealing with, or diminishing the value of any of the PSA assets.
The injunction applies to all of the PSA’s assets, including accounts at RBC, JMMB, Republic Bank, Scotiabank, Unit Trust Corporation, Trintoplan Investment, and Plipdeco, as well as four vehicles.
The PSA members were also represented by Tekani Trim, while John Heath and Lionel Luckhoo appeared alongside Persad for the PSA.
Scotiabank was represented by Jean-Louis Kelly.