The Tribune

By LAMECH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

ljohnson@tribunemedia.net

AXED NIB Chairman Gregory Moss walked away from the Supreme Court yesterday without handcuffs or a fine over his head after a judge ruled against a contempt application brought against him by National Insurance Board Director Algernon Cargill.

Mr Cargill, as directed by Chief Justice Sir Michael Barnett in his 18-page ruling, will have to take on the cost of Moss’ legal fees for bringing to court the contempt application, which the judge dismissed.

Mr Moss and his attorney’s Krystal Rolle and Shantelle Munroe had fought the contempt application brought by Mr Cargill who claimed that Moss failed to obey a court order filed on December 19 forbidding him to publish the words that became the basis of the defamation claim that originally featured in an email of September 18 from Mr Moss and in a letter dated November 8, signed by Mr Moss.

Mr Cargill, and his attorneys Alfred Sears and Jeffery Lloyd, had been granted permission on January 10 by the Chief Justice to make an application arguing for former NIB chairman Gregory Moss to be imprisoned for contempt of court.

Mr Cargill claimed that those words were included again in a press release issued by Mr Moss.

Mr Sears, referring to the press release issued by Moss at the beginning of the new year, read Mr Cargill’s complaints where “Mr Moss asserts that I provided him with an NIB credit card.”

He said that the allegations made in the press release were similar to the ones in the letter and email “to the extent that they contain erroneous accusations about our client.”

In response to those claims, Mr Moss and his attorneys objected to the contempt application on the basis that a “proper application” had not been made and further argued that there had been no breach on Moss’ part.

In yesterday’s proceedings, a week after the contempt hearing before Chief Justice Sir Michael Barnett, the chief justice ruled that there was no breach of the undertaking by Mr Moss.

At the contempt hearing, Ms Rolle argued that the present proceedings should not have been happening because no “proper application” had been put before the court due to the plaintiffs’ filing their notice of motion within the regulated time frame “after” the court gives permission for them to make the application.

She noted that the plaintiff had filed notice of motion days before they had even been granted leave by the court, which she said, is not the lawful procedure.

Responding to that point in the ruling handed down yesterday, the chief justice noted that the court “has a substantial interest” in ensuring that its Rules of Procedure are followed.

“A party cannot simply ignore the rules and expect the court to relieve him of the requirement to comply with them on the basis of “no harm, no foul.” The power to waive the requirements of the rules must not be exercised so readily lest what should be a power for use in exceptional cases may gradually undermine the express requirements of the rules.”

“Albeit with much reluctance” he added, “I would not dismiss the motion on the basis that the statement was defective for want of particularity. I am not satisfied that the second defendant (Moss) did not understand what was being alleged against him and was in fact, fully able to meet the case against him.”

In response to Mr Sear’s arguments on the issue itself, “none of these matters complained or repeat any of the allegations contained in the e-mail or letter.”

“None of them are in fact similar allegations of the matters complained of in the e-mail and the letter. The allegations with respect to the corporate credit card in the press release to the second defendant’s credit card and not the plaintiff’s credit card which is the matter complained of in the writ.”

“I accept that word ‘similar’ does not mean ‘identical’ the chief justice added.

He went on to say that there was no breach of the undertaking and that the words published in the press release “were not defamatory of the plaintiff.”

He dismissed the application and awarded costs to Mr Moss.