Warners’ lawyers allowed to argue for reinstatement of defamation ruling

News Jada Loutoo 17 Hrs Ago

Allan Warner. -

ATTORNEYS for Tobago business magnate Allan Warner and his son, Aluko, have been allowed to persuade the judge, who had reversed an earlier ruling in their favour in a defamation lawsuit against a local newspaper, to reconsider his decision.

On April 11, Justice Devindra Rampersad delivered an oral ruling in favour of the Warners' in their claim against the Trinidad Guardian, entering judgment in default after the newspaper failed to file a defence.

However, on April 14, the judge recalled both his ruling and the related orders, citing “mature reflection and reconsideration.” On April 16, Justice Rampersad allowed attorneys to present submissions by April 29, with a ruling on their arguments expected by May 5.

In a notice to the attorneys, the judge indicated that since a final decision was still pending, the April 14 order would not be perfected, as it had not yet been finalised.

In overturning his previous decision, Justice Rampersad said that the court had not properly considered the legal principles involved and, upon reevaluation, believed that the initial decision should be changed.

In his amended ruling, the judge stated that the court would exercise its discretion not to enter judgment in default of defence. The substantive matter was adjourned to June 27 for a case management conference.

When contacted, the Warners’ attorneys described the judge’s reversal as a highly unusual development, noting that it was unexpected for a judge to grant judgment on a Friday and then completely change his mind by Monday.

They indicated their intention to explore all fair and just avenues available to their clients. The Warners’ defamation claim stemmed from two articles and corresponding social media posts concerning police investigations into illegal quarrying.

They alleged that the publications had caused them shame and embarrassment, affecting both their family life and business operations, and had left them traumatised by what they described as persistent attacks on their character.

They also asserted that the seriousness of the allegations had the potential to go viral and attract the attention of conspiracy theorists and gossip-driven audiences among the newspaper’s readership.