Gegg v Marin, Minister of Natural Resources and the Enviroment
| Judge | Hafiz, J. |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 2008 |
| Court | Supreme Court (Belize) |
| Docket Number | 492 of 2007 |
| Date | 01 January 2008 |
Supreme Court
Hafiz, J.
492 of 2007
Mrs. Naima Barrow-Badillo for claimant.
Ms. Pricilla J. Banner for defendant.
Judicial Review - Natural justice — Whether decision to cancel claimant's permit breached the audi alteram partem rule — Breach of Legitimate Expectations — Unreasonableness — Finding that defendant's decision was made with improper motives — Certiorari.
The claimant David Gegg is a Businessman of 950 Bella Vista, Belize City, Belize.
The defendant is Hon. Florencio Marin, who was the Minister of Natural Resources. The Government has since changed. However, the defendant is really the Government of Belize.
On 6th December, 2007, permission was granted under Rule 56.4 (2) of the Supreme Court ( Civil Procedure) Rules 2005, for the claimant to file judicial review proceedings to review and quash the decision of the then Minister to cancel some several permits granted to the claimant. On 14th December, 2007, the claimant filed the present judicial review proceedings challenging the Minister's decision.
The facts as shown in the affidavit of the claimant is that on or as of the 1st day of August, 1995, he acquired a lease from the Government of Belize for a parcel of land designated as parcel 3566/1, Block 16, Caribbean Shores Registration Section for a term of thirty years commencing on the 1st August, 1995. On or about the 5th August 1998, he duly mortgaged his interest in the said parcel to secure the repayment of BZ$50,000.00 to the Atlantic Bank Limited. Then in about 20th October, 2005, he applied for permission to purchase the parcel and the Government agreed to sell. He purchased the freehold interest in the said Parcel 3566/1 for the purchase price of BZ39,149.96. He is still awaiting the delivery of a Certificate of Title for the said parcel No. 3566. He had applied for and acquired Parcel No. 3566 for the specific purpose of building a marina which was disclosed in his original application to lease submitted to the Government in or about August 1995.
The claimant is a director and shareholder of Discovery Expeditions Limited which is in the business of providing tours to tourists in Belize. He is also a director and shareholder of Cruise Expeditions Limited which is also in the business of providing tours and services specifically to cruise ship passengers visiting Belize. Together Discovery Expeditions Limited and Cruise Solutions Limited own and operate in excess of 20 boats in the course of their business. A number of the boats of these companies are kept in the canals in the area of Bella Vista and the Belize City Council had brought legal action to prevent such further use of the canals.
The marina was primarily intended to function as a base of operation for and to accommodate the boats of the abovementioned two companies. The marina was however designed to accommodate about 56 boats in total in order to make the same commercially viable.
When the Government agreed to sell the freehold interest in Parcel 3566/1, the claimant engaged the services of Ian Morrison of Enviro-Plan Limited to develop the idea of the construction of the marina and to secure all necessary permits for the constructions. They secured the necessary permits in relation to the project. In or about the 11th day of April, 2007 on the basis of permits and plans secured, the claimant applied for and secured a loan from Atlantic Bank Limited for BZ1,400,000.00 to construct the marina and related developments thereon. The loan has been partly disbursed and utilised and attracts interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum. The utilised portion of the loan amounts to BZ$445,000.00.
On the 27th day of August, 2007 the claimant received a letter dated the 8th day of August, 2007 from the Commissioner of Lands and Surveys in the Lands and Surveys Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment informing him that the Ministry had decided to revoke the permits granted to him in respect of the construction of a Marina and Pier. See Exhibit “ D.G. 6” for letter.
It is against these revocation of the permits the applicant is seeking to quash the decision of the Minister to do so.
The grounds on which relief is sought are that:
-
(1) The defendant's decision to cancel the Permits was made in breach of the principles of natural justice in that the complainant was never given prior notification that the defendant was considering canceling the Permits and the complainant was never given any opportunity to be heard in relation thereto;
-
(2) The defendant decision to cancel the Permits was in breach of the claimant's legitimate expectation that the Permits would not be cancelled except in accordance with their terms and conditions;
-
(3) The defendant's decision to cancel the Permits was unreasonable as the power to cancel Permits was exercised for a purpose alien to that for which they were granted in that the defendant took into account irrelevant considerations; and
-
(4) The defendant's decision to cancel the permits was motivated by inappropriate political consideration arising out of the very public nature of opposition voiced and widely publicised against the proposed marina and pier.
The claimant deposed that the defendant's decision to cancel the Permits was made in breach of the principles of natural justice in that he was never given prior notification that the defendant was considering canceling the Permits and he was never given any opportunity to be heard in relation thereto.
The claimant says that the permits cancelled by the defendant were all granted subject to express conditions set out in the Permits and he was aware that the Permits may have been cancelled if there was a failure to adhere to any of the conditions contained therein. He said that the defendant cancelled the Permits although all the conditions of the Permits were observed. He deposed that the defendant's decision to cancel the Permits was in breach of his legitimate expectation that the Permits would not be cancelled except in accordance with their terms and conditions.
The claimant further deposed that at all times he was aware that the Permits may have been cancelled if there was a failure to adhere to any of the conditions contained therein. As there was strict compliance with the terms and conditions on which the permits were granted and the defendant nonetheless cancelled the permits, the defendant's decision to cancel the permits was obviously based on some unknown and unrelated factor. That the defendant's decision to cancel the Permits was unreasonable as the power to cancel Permits was exercised for a purpose alien to that for which they were granted in that the defendant took into account irrelevant considerations.
The claimant deposed that in late April 2007 he visited with Romel Perdomo of Travellers Liquors in relation to unrelated business and informed him verbally of the project that was then about to commence. A number of hours after leaving the meeting he received a call informing him that the Perdomos were expressing opposition to the Marina Project in West Landivar. Unknown to him, members of the Perdomo Family lived in the general area of the proposed development. At the time he was having meetings with the Belize City Council to secure approval of the building plans for the marina facility. He was later informed by the Belize City Council that they would be holding public consultations on the project. In anticipation of the consultations, certain residents of the area canvassed the neighbourhood and secured significant opposition to the project by inter alia misrepresenting the description of the project to the residents. The public consultations thereafter held demonstrated significant public opposition to the project. See paragraphs 27–32.
The claimant further deposed that the defendant's decision to cancel the permits was motivated by inappropriate political considerations arising out of the very public nature of opposition voiced and widely publicised against the proposed marina pier.
The claimant says that on the 7th day of September, 2007 his lawyer wrote to the Commissioner of Lands and Surveys in the Lands and Surveys Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment on his behalf asking that the cancellation of the permits be reconsidered. However, he is not aware that the Minister has given any consideration to the matter in question or gave any response to the complainant which has been made.
Further, he deposed at paragraph 36 that on the 20th October, 2007 the defendant, in the exercise of powers vested in him under section (6) subsections (1) and (3) of the National Lands Act, Chapter 191 of the Laws of Belize, Revised Edition 2003, sought to declare land which includes Parcel No. 3566 to be a public reserve.
Mr. Gegg also deposed to a further affidavit sworn to on 29th May, 2008 in which he said that on or about the 3rd day of May, 2007 the Belize City Council held a public consultation on the marina facilities he had proposed to build on Parcel No. 3566, Block 16, Caribbean Shores. He said both Jose Coye, the then area representative for Caribbean Shores, the constituency in which the marina was to be located, and Carlos Perdomo, the then United Democratic Party (UDP) standard bearer for the Caribbean Shores attended the public consultation and made their views know. He said that Mr. Perdomo appeared to champion the cause of the people while Mr. Coye indicated his belief that as the representative of the people he was bound to submit to the will of the people.
Mr. Gegg said that after the public consultation, he employed Mr. Rayford Gordon to attend upon the residents of the West Landivar area of...
To continue reading
Request your trial