Bryant Williams dba Griga Line v Minister of Youth, Sports & Transport

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Judge: Chabot, J.
• Judgment Date: 09 November 2023
• Court: Supreme Court (Belize)
• Year: 2023
• Docket Number: CLAIM No. CV 134 of 2022

Between:

[1] Bryant Williams dba Griga Line

[2] James Williams JR dba James Bus Line

[3] Belizean Bus Association

Claimants

and

[1] Minister of Youth, Sports & Transport

[2] Transport Board

[3] The Attorney General

[4] Chief Transport Officer

[5] Chairperson of Transport Board

[6] Chief Executive Officer of the Ministry of Youth, Sports & Transport

Defendants

and

[1] Floralia Ltd.

Interested Party

CLAIM No. CV 134 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BELIZE

Appearances:

Rt. Hon. Dean O. Barrow, S.C. and Darinka Muñoz for the Claimants

Samantha Matute and Alea Gomez for the Defendants

Wayne A. Piper for the Interested Party

Chabot, J.

1 The claimants challenge the defendants' decisions to award road service permits to Floralia Ltd. (“Floralia”) to operate bus runs along the Punta Gorda – Belize City route and the Independence – Belize City route. They also challenge the defendants' decision to deny Bryant Williams road service permits for runs he previously operated along the Dangriga – Belize City route. The claimants allege that the defendants failed to consider Floralia's and Bryant Williams' applications in accordance with the statutory regime in place. They also allege that they were denied their natural justice rights, that irrelevant factors were taken into consideration, and that the Transport Board abdicated its duty to consider and decide Floralia's and Bryant Williams' applications. The defendants maintain they acted fairly and in compliance with the statutory regime.

2 For the reasons set out in this judgment, the claim is granted. I find that, in coming to their decisions, the defendants failed to comply with the statutory requirements and breached the claimants' right to be heard. I also find that the Transport Board abdicated its duty to consider and decide Floralia's and Bryant Williams' applications. The decisions at issue are quashed and the applications are remitted to the Transport Board for their proper consideration. The claimants are awarded damages. In order to limit any hardship to the public, the orders in this judgment will take effect on 10 ^th December 2023 at 12:01am.

Background

3 The first claimant, Bryant Williams d.b.a. Griga Line (“Bryant Williams”), and the second claimant, James Williams Jr. d.b.a. as James Bus Line (“James Williams”) are bus operators. The third claimant, the Belizean Bus Association (the “Association”) is an autonomous corporate body that advocates for the rights of its member bus owners.

4 Bryant Williams operated his business along the Dangriga – Belize City route under a road service permit granted on 19 ^th October 2013. The road service permit was issued in the name of Bryant Williams' family member, Calbert Williams Sr., now deceased. Bryant Williams alleges that he was able to renew his road service permit, and acquire additional road service permits, up to 18 ^th October 2021. He was then granted an extension from the Transport Board up to December 2021. The renewal applications for his road service permits were denied on or around 11 ^th March 2022.

5 James Williams operated his business along the Punta Gorda – Belize City route under 14 road service permits issued in his name. According to the record, his road service permits were set to expire in June of 2023.

6 According to the claimants, in or around November 2021, Floralia started operating along the Punta Gorda – Belize City route. Floralia's runs were within 15 to 30 minutes of Bryant Williams and James Williams' runs. Around February 2022, Floralia began operating along the Independence – Belize City route. As a result of Floralia's operations, Bryant Williams and James Williams allege they lost substantial revenues.

7 On or around 9 ^th February 2022, Bryant Williams was informed that his road service permits for runs along the Dangriga – Belize City route would not be renewed. Bryant Williams contends that he had a legitimate expectation that the Transport Board would consider his renewal applications in accordance with the Motor Vehicles and Road Traffic Act 1 and the Regulations. 2

8 The claimants allege that Floralia did not formally apply to the Transport Board for road service permits. Even if it did, these applications were not considered by the Transport Board in accordance with the Act and the Regulations. The dates of the Transport Board meetings at which these applications were considered were not published in the Gazette as required by the Regulations. Floralia's road service permits have not been submitted to the Transport Board for consideration and approval. The claimants were thus deprived of an opportunity to raise any objections to Floralia's applications.

9 The claimants further allege that the Minister of Youth, Sports & Transport (the “Minister”) made the unilateral decision to approve Floralia's applications for road

service permits. The Minister does not have the discretion to decide the grant of a road service permit under the Act or the Regulations, and as such the Minister acted outside of his lawful powers

10 The claimants challenge three decisions (together, the “Decisions”):

• a. The decision made on or around 24 ^th November 2021 to award Floralia road service permits for runs along the Punta Gorda – Belize City route (the “First Decision”).

• b. The decision made on or around 9 ^th February 2022 to award Floralia road service permits for runs along the Independence – Belize City route (the “Second Decision”).

• c. The decision made on or around 9 ^th February 2022 to reject Bryant Williams' applications for road service permits for runs along the Dangriga – Belize City route (the “Third Decision”).

11 The Claimants seek the following reliefs:

• a. A declaration that the first, second and fifth defendants and the Ministry of Youth, Sports & Transport acted unlawfully and ultra vires by, inter alia, awarding road service permits, on or about 24 ^th November 2021, for Punta Gorda to Belize City runs to Floralia in excess of their statutory powers, in breach of the Act, and in breach of the Regulations; by, albeit informally, in or around February, 2022 awarding Floralia a second road service permit for the Dangriga to Belize City Runs; and, via the Transport Board on 9 ^th February 2022, by rejecting the first claimant's renewal applications. These decisions, the claimants urge, are null and void.

• b. A declaration that the first, second, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants and their Ministry have not acted fairly towards the claimants, and have breached the rules of natural justice in making the Decisions to give Floralia routes and runs that are similar to, and merely half an hour or 15-minutes apart from, some of the first and second claimants' routes and runs; that they have likewise acted unfairly and breached the rules of natural justice in not renewing the first claimant's road service permits for runs between Dangriga and Belize City, but making instead the second and third decisions rejecting the first claimant's renewal applications and giving those runs to Floralia and D-line. The claimants say that these decisions are null and void.

• c. A declaration that the first and fifth defendants have not acted fairly towards the third claimant and have breached basic rules of natural justice, the Act and the Regulations in making their decisions granting Floralia's application for the Punta Gorda to Belize City Runs in a way that deprived the third claimant of the opportunity of reviewing Floralia's supposed application for those runs; that those defendants also breached fair play and the rules of natural justice by denying the third claimant the opportunity to participate in their second decision rejecting the first claimant's renewal application.

• d. A declaration that the second defendant wrongfully abdicated its duty to consider and decide Floralia's applications for road service permits, including the supposed application for the Punta Gorda to Belize City Runs and the application conflicting with the first claimant's renewal application for his Dangriga/Belize City road service permits, by allowing the Chairman of the second defendant and/or the Chief Transport Officer and/or the Minister to make the said decision.

• e. A declaration that the first and fifth defendants' decisions were not based on a consideration of relevant factors, did not afford the claimants an opportunity to be properly heard, and were not done by way of a statutorily required meeting of the second defendant Transport Board.

• f. A declaration that the first, second and fifth defendants acted unlawfully by failing to provide the first claimant an opportunity to be heard on his renewal application for road service permits for the Dangriga to Belize City and return runs, which permits he had held since 2013; and by failing to provide the second claimant an opportunity to make representations on Floralia's purported application for the Punta Gorda to Belize City and return runs.

• g. A declaration that the first, second, fifth and sixth defendants breached the first claimant's legitimate expectation that his renewal application for road service permits would be properly considered by the second defendant in accordance with the Act and Regulations.

• h. An order of certiorari to quash the decision made on 6 ^th December 2021, by the first and second defendants and their Ministry, to award road service permits to Floralia for Punta Gorda/Belize City runs; and to quash Floralia's road service permits issued consequent upon, and pursuant to, that decision.

• i. An order of certiorari to quash the second decision to award road service permits to Floralia and D-line for the Dangriga to Belize City and return runs.

• j. An order of certiorari to quash the third decision to reject the first claimant's renewal applications.

• k. An order mandating that the second defendant consider, in accordance with the Act and Regulations, the...