The state has been blocked for a second time from collecting any completed Valuation Return Forms, commonly called the Property Tax Forms, from members of the public.
Justice Frank Seepersad granted an injunction yesterday preventing the Commissioner of Valuations from receiving the forms from members of the public. The order will remain in effect until June 27, when the judge will decide whether to continue it or if it will be varied.
Seepersad had granted an interim stay on May 19 halting the enforcement and implementation of the form until yesterday. The State has since appealed this decision and this comes up before the Court of Appeal on Tuesday.
When the case management conference for the judicial review trial came up in the San Fernando High Court yesterday, lead attorney Anand Ramlogan, who is representing for former agriculture minister Devant Maharaj, made a fresh application, verbally, for an injunction to continue to prevent the state from collecting the forms.
This was strongly opposed by lead attorney Russell Martineau SC, who is representing the interests of Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi and attorney Fyard Hosein SC, the lead attorney for the commissioner. They argued that Maharaj’s attorneys ought to have made a written application and they were highly prejudiced because they were caught by surprise. Martineau also argued that the matter is before Court of Appeal and any application for further relief should be made before that court.
Seepersad, however, ruled that he was just and warranted to hear the oral application.
In his 28-page judgment, Seepersad said, “The balance of convenience and the interest of justice is not weighted in favour of the Respondents (AG and Commissioner) and a greater risk of prejudice lies in the continuation of a process which on the face of the existing law, may have been undertaken without measured consideration and without proper regard to the provisions of the act.
“Ultimately, the public interest can never be best served if the court permits such a state of affairs to continue before it resolves the issues raised at the trial and accordingly the court must now consider the sixth issue.”
He added: “While the court is mindful that the respondents have not had a full opportunity to carefully consider the claimant’s oral application, and to determine whether it wished to adduce evidence in opposition to same, with respect to the impact on the rights of third parties and on any other relevant issue, the court does feel that the overriding objective and the interest of justice is best served by the grant of an interim order until such time as all of the relevant information is placed before the court and a proper and considered determination can be made as to whether the interim order now granted ought to continue until the trial of this action.”
The judge set the matter, in which Maharaj is challenging the legality of the Property Tax, for trial on September 19 at the Port-of-Spain Supreme Court and September 21 at the San Fernando Supreme Court. The judge also gave directions on specific dates to file the necessary documents and reserved costs until the completion of the trial.
