{"id":214445,"date":"2024-10-22T13:27:19","date_gmt":"2024-10-22T17:27:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antiguanewsroom.com\/?p=214445"},"modified":"2024-10-22T13:39:50","modified_gmt":"2024-10-22T17:39:50","slug":"ccj-dismisses-case-brought-by-former-policy-holders-of-baico-in-antigua-and-grenada","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antiguanewsroom.com\/ccj-dismisses-case-brought-by-former-policy-holders-of-baico-in-antigua-and-grenada\/","title":{"rendered":"CCJ Dismisses case brought by former policyholders of BAICO in Antigua and Grenada"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a><\/div>
\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

CCJ Dismisses $800 Million Claim by BAICO Policyholders Against Trinidad and Tobago Government<\/strong><\/p>

\"\"<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Antigua Newsroom:<\/em><\/strong> The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) today dismissed an $800 million claim brought by former policyholders of the failed British American Insurance Company (BAICO) against the government of Trinidad and Tobago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The claim was filed by policyholders from Antigua and Barbuda and Grenada under the court’s original jurisdiction, which allows it to handle disputes arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>
\"\"<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The case centered on allegations that Trinidad and Tobago\u2019s bailout of subsidiaries of CL Financial Limited (CLF), the parent company of BAICO, discriminated against BAICO policyholders outside of Trinidad and Tobago. <\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n

After CLF collapsed in 2009, the Trinidad and Tobago government stepped in to rescue its locally registered subsidiaries, including Colonial Life Insurance Company (CLICO) and BAICO’s Trinidad operations, but no relief was extended to policyholders in other CARICOM member states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chief Justice Adrian Saunders delivered the court\u2019s judgment, concluding that the actions taken by Trinidad and Tobago to bail out CLF and its subsidiaries were in line with the exceptions provided under Article 32 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. <\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The court found that the measures were properly within the state’s exercise of governmental authority and were aimed at mitigating the effects of the collapse on the local economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The policyholders claimed that the Trinidad and Tobago government had violated several articles of the Revised Treaty, specifically Articles 36, 37, 38, and 184, which address discrimination and consumer protection. However, the court determined that these claims were not justified, as the government’s actions did not fall within the scope of the treaty’s provisions governing competition policy and consumer protection.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The court also noted that Article 184, which requires member states to provide adequate and effective redress for consumers, cannot be read in isolation from the broader context of competition policy and consumer protection law. The court found that the language used in the treaty did not create a legal obligation for Trinidad and Tobago to compensate BAICO policyholders in other CARICOM member states.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, the court ruled that the claimants had not established that they were treated less favorably than similarly situated individuals, nor that any alleged discrimination was based solely on nationality, as required by Article 7 of the treaty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The CCJ ultimately dismissed the claim and ordered that each party bear its own costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chief Justice Saunders emphasized that the court\u2019s judgment was final and that copies of the judgment would be made available to the parties involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WATCH THE FULL JUDGEMENT SUMMARY BELOW:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n