Law books defamation case: Nandlall to seek increase in award of damages against Basil Williams

…says “$10M is not adequate” for gravity of harm done

Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC, has expressed his dissatisfaction with the $10M award for damages his predecessor Basil Williams, SC, has been ordered to pay to him for defamation over allegations of him stealing law reports from the Attorney General’s Chambers.
And while Williams has appealed that judgement, arguing that it is erroneous and misdirected in law; Nandlall plans to file a cross-appeal in which he intends to seek a higher award of damages.
“I will challenge the quantum of damages awarded, for I feel that $10M is not adequate, having regard to the gravity of the harm done and having regard to recent defamation awards made by our courts in assessing compensation/damages in particular in defamation cases,” said Nandlall during a recent airing of his weekly programme “Issues in the News”.
Explaining how damages are decided, Nandlall noted that Judges are guided by awards made in similar circumstances, “and if one is to examine the awards made recently, one will conclude that $10M is an award to the lower end of the spectrum rather than to the upper end…”

The Attorney General is expected to lodge his legal documents soon.
In a Notice of Appeal filed with the Court of Appeal, Williams, who is appearing on his own behalf, advances, inter alia, that the entire decision of Justice Priya Sewnarine-Beharry is against the weight of the evidence, and that she erred in law and misdirected herself when she failed to give him adequate time to conduct his defence.
The denial of a fair hearing, he argues, is contrary to Article 144 (8) of the Constitution, and is a violation of his fundamental right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial court.
Further, Williams argues that the Judge failed to take judicial note or consider whether a short video exhibited by Nandlall of him allegedly uttering defamatory statements was fake, generated five years later by artificial intelligence (AI) voice-cloning technology and photo-shopping internet technology to the prejudice of him.
In the circumstances, he is asking the Appellate Court to set aside and/or reverse Justice Sewnarine-Beharry’s ruling, and that costs be awarded to him in the court below.

In the decision, handed down on June 30, Justice Sewnarine-Beharry, after deliberating on the evidence led by both parties, found that Williams had tarnished the reputation and professional standing of Nandlall when he made remarks accusing him of stealing law reports from the State.
Those allegations were always vehemently denied by Nandlall, who had testified that when he was appointed Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs in 2011, he had requested that, as a condition of his service during his time in office, the Government take over payment arrangements that he had with LexisNexis UK in relation to the Commonwealth Law Reports.
He had further testified that those terms and conditions had been agreed to by then President Donald Ramotar, and were made part of his terms of employment, resulting in him receiving 14 volumes of the Commonwealth Law Reports under this arrangement.
When the APNU/AFC Coalition came into Government in 2015, Nandlall had briefed Williams on this arrangement; however, through press reports, he had learned that Williams had commissioned a special audit into the Law Reports, Justice Sewnarine-Beharry said in her decision.
“During the course of the investigation, the Auditor General contacted [Nandlall] for a response, and later submitted his findings in a report in January 2016. This report did not implicate either [Nandlall] or the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Legal Affairs in any wrongdoing,” the Judge had said.
Notwithstanding this, the Judge said, whenever Nandlall, a critic of Williams, was publicly critical of Williams, the latter would threaten to embarrass Nandlall by making the Law Report issue contentious, and implicating him in some law books scandal.
“This caused [Nandlall] to issue a public statement disclosing that the law reports were a condition of his service,” the Judge noted.
For his part, Williams relied on the defence of justification, knowing that he could not prove that his statements were true, according to the Judge.
She said the former Attorney General also insisted on pursuing the defence of fair comment “although there was no factual basis for such a defence.”
In assessing the sum of damages to award to Nandlall, Justice Sewnarine-Beharry explained that she considered that Williams’s defamatory statements were made during a press conference that was reported on by several media entities and live-streamed on Facebook.
Moreover, she also took into consideration Williams’s failure to apologise or publish an apology to Nandlall. As such, damages in the sum of $10M were awarded to Nandlall, the Attorney General.
Interest on the said sum has been awarded at a rate of six per cent per annum from April 4, 2017 to June 29, 2023, and four per cent per annum thereafter until the sum is fully paid.
Williams has also been ordered to pay Nandlall $1,650,000 in costs on or before August 18.
Nandlall, who filed the lawsuit in April 2017, was represented by Darshan Ramdhani, KC, and Attorney-at-Law Rajendra Jaigobin; while Williams had represented himself.
Back in 2017, the Police had charged Nandlall with the offence of larceny by bailee.
That charge had stated that between May 8, 2015 and May 29, 2015, while being the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, and having 14 Law Reports valued at $2.3M belonging to the Legal Affairs Ministry, he fraudulently converted them to his own use and benefit.
However, the charge was discontinued by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Shalimar Ali-Hack, SC, in October 2020, a few months after the PPP/C had been returned to office.
The Attorney General had always maintained that he was innocent. (G1)