Former Attorney General and Clico legal adviser Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj yesterday appealed to the Government to pay the money owed to the United Policyholders Group. Maharaj’s appeal comes ahead of the January 18, 19 and 20 Privy Council hearing on the matter in London.
Almost exactly one year ago, Maharaj had filed an appeal before the Privy Council challenging a Court of Appeal ruling, which had reversed that of High Court judge Justice Joan Charles, who had ordered the (PP) Government to honour its promise to the policy holders, and pay them the full amounts due on their policies of insurance with accrued interest.
The previous administration had only paid the policyholders 85 per cent and now the United Policyholders group are asking for the remaining 15 per cent plus any interest which would have accumulated. According to Maharaj the accumulated interest plus the 15 per cent would total about $250 million.
Addressing scores of Clico Policyholders yesterday, at Gaston Courts, Chaguanas, Maharaj said he did not agree with the judgement of the Court of Appeal and therefore, “we are asking for the Privy Council to restore the judgement of the High Court judge and to give judgement in favour of the Policyholders.”
Confident that the Privy Council would rule in favour of the group, he said: “I don’t think the Privy Council would rule in favour of the government and I have not considered that. I am totally confident that the Privy Council would restore the ruling of the High Court judge and I am not considering the other position.”
He added that the Group has been writing the Central Bank to find out when they would be paid but they continue to wait. If the Privy Council rules in favour of the group, according to Maharaj, it would be a landmark decision.
“It will not only influence the development of law in T&T, it will develop the law in the Commonwealth and in the English-Speaking world. It will be a judgement, in my view, which would vindicate the stance of policyholders and it will be a judgement which could be used as a precedent for other commonwealth governments not to dishonour legitimate expectations especially in circumstances where there is a promissory note to pay people who are owed monies.”