The CCJ is at present the final Court of Appeal for Barbados, Guyana, and Belize and Dominica. However, in respect of all the countries in the Caribbean Community it has an original jurisdiction which primarily relates to trade disputes between Member States and between private entities and Member States.

We have successfully initiated the first two cases to go to trial before the CCJ in its original jurisdiction:

1. CCJ Application No. OA2 of 2009 - Trinidad Cement Limited and TCL Guyana Incorporated v. The Government of The Co-Operative Republic of Guyana
   The Republic of Guyana held to be in breach of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas for failing to maintain the Common External Tariff on cement imported from countries outside of the Caribbean Community.”
2. CCJ Application OA1 of 2009 – Trinidad Cement Limited v. The Caribbean Community
   Court held that judicial review remedies are available against decisions of the Council on Trade and Community Development in relation to the grant of suspensions of the Common External Tariff on cement.
3. In 2012, the third Originating Application made on behalf of Trinidad Cement Limited, CCJ Application No OA 1 of 2012 – Trinidad Cement Limited v. Competition Commission was completed. The CCJ refused an application by TCL for Judicial Review of decisions of the Commission to commence an investigation of allegations of market abuse by TCL.
4. SM Jaleel Limited v The Cooperative Republic of Guyana
   The main issue which arose was whether the tax overpaid by the taxpayer should be refunded. Adjudication of this matter involved considering the issues of Laches, Strict Liability and Passing On.

Securities

Insider Trading and Securities Legislation
(Advised extensively on the requirements needed to be satisfied for insider trading offences.)

National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago Limited v Clico Investment Bank Limited
(Claim involving the question of the nature of instruments issued and whether they were Securities. Claim withdrawn prior to trial. Arguments raised in this case were upheld by the High Court in related claim which proceeded to trial.)