Ferguson failed to fulfil requirements necessary for default judgement – lawyer

$20M default judgement

…urges court to dismiss lawsuit

Justice Sandra Kurtzious set July 16, 2021, as the date she will rule on Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo’s application to set aside a $20 million default judgement awarded against him in a defamation lawsuit mounted against him by former APNU/AFC Government Minister Annette Ferguson.
At a Zoom hearing on Monday, Justice Kurtzious fixed that date to render her decision following brief submissions by counsel for the parties.
Ferguson had filed the lawsuit in January 2020 and claimed therein that Jagdeo, who was at the time Leader of the Opposition, made defamatory statements in which he questioned her acquisition of a house lot and the construction of her home at Eccles on the East Bank of Demerara.
Apart from an order setting aside the judgement, Jagdeo’s lawyer, Devindra

Kissoon, is also asking the court to dismiss Ferguson’s lawsuit for delay in accordance with Part 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
On March 11, 2021, Justice Kurtzious, pursuant to Part 12:01 (2) (d) of the CPR, rendered the default judgement after Jagdeo failed to file a defence within the required time.
But Jagdeo’s lawyer is seeking to have the judgement set aside on the basis that it was “improper” and “irregular”. Kissoon argued that Ferguson has not fulfilled the requirements necessary for the grant of a default judgement.
Since Ferguson’s claim was for an unspecified sum in damages, Jagdeo argued that the court should not have issued a default judgement sum without inviting his lawyer to an assessment hearing.
Shortly after the filing of the lawsuit, Kissoon said that Jagdeo retained Anil Nandlall, SC, the current Attorney General, to represent his interest. The lawyer added that Nandlall drafted a defence in this matter before January 27, 2020, but owing to several reasons, the defence was not filed.
Kissoon deposed that at the time the defence was due, Nandlall was legal adviser to Jagdeo and was also a senior member of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP); responsible for large portions of the party’s campaign for the March 2020 national elections.
Even after the elections concluded, Kissoon added that Nandlall continued to be extensively and exclusively engaged in matters relating to elections, including acting as lead counsel in election-related litigation, as well as matters involving a recount of votes.
“These tasks resulted in Mr Nandlall inadvertently failing to file the defence though drafted. This inadvertence was not due to neglect, but rather a combination of unusual and exceptional circumstances, which caused counsel to simply be unable to comply with the time limits established by the rules.”
Additionally, Kissoon submitted that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the shuttering of Nandlall’s law office for several months and the subsequent relocation of files. Because of this, the lawyer stated that Nandlall did not discover that the defence, though drafted, was not filed.
According to Kissoon, “[Jagdeo] ought not to be penalised for law office inadvertence.”
Jagdeo’s lawyer has since filed his defence in which he argues that his client has a real prospect of successfully defending the lawsuit, since the statements made by him were not defamatory and the defences of justification, fair comment, qualified privilege, and the provisions of the Defamation Act apply.
“In any event, it is clear from the facts alleged in the Statement of Claim that the comments concerned the distribution of State land and the conduct of public officials, which are matters of public interest and matters concerning the discharge of public functions, [Jagdeo], a constitutional office holder, being entitled to bring these matters to the public’s attention,” Kissoon put forward.
Taking this into consideration, he submitted that Jagdeo acted “reasonably and responsibly”.
Meanwhile, Ferguson is urging the court to dismiss the Vice President’s application.
Ferguson filed an identical lawsuit against Guyana Times, which she claimed published articles based on Jagdeo’s statements. This matter is still engaging the attention of the High Court. (G1)