WHEN the $9M action filed by Reeaz Enterprise against the Guyana Revenue Authority and the Commissioner of Customs, was called up for hearing before Justice Jainarayan Singh yesterday, Attorney-at-law Ms Althea Carmichael representing the defendants, applied for further particulars.
Attorney-at-law Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan for the plaintiff objected to the application, pointing out that all the particulars were included in the statement of claim. Ramjattan added: "This action will be proved by video tape."
The lawyer then recalled that after the containers were unlawfully detained at the DDL Wharf, the opening of the containers and the removal of the contents were videotaped in the presence of the judge.
Noting that the defendants had not yet filed a defence, Mr. Ramjattan told the Court that if perhaps they wanted time to file their defence, he would agree that they be given time to do so and then a date could be fixed for hearing.
The plaintiff's lawyer pointed out that all the particulars that could be required are contained in paragraph 16 in the statement of claim.
Justice Jainarayan Singh, however, granted the defendants time to file a defence and fixed September 10, 2004, at 10:00 hrs as the new date for hearing.
On that day, Justice Singh will begin hearing the $9M action brought by Reeaz Trading Enterprise Limited against the Guyana Revenue Authority and the Commissioner of Customs and Trade Administration.
The case had its genesis in early December 2002, when the plaintiff imported a shipment of goods for the Christmas season.
These goods came in four 40-foot containers and were duly off-loaded onto the DDL Wharf, Georgetown.
According to the statement of claim, the containers were physically examined by Customs to ensure that the quantities therein matched the amounts declared on the invoices and declared entry forms.
That on the same day, one of the said Customs officers, who did the physical verification at the DDL Wharf, discovered that two of the containers' numbers were not on the entry form.
It is said that the plaintiff corrected that minor error that was made by the broker, and thereafter, all of the four 40-foot containers were released into the company's custody.
Subsequently, the Commissioner of Customs and Trade Administration ordered that the containers should not be removed from the said wharf. The containers were taken into custody of the Customs, the statement of claim disclosed.
In his statement of claim, Reeaz Khan, the Managing Director of the company also said that when the Commissioner was questioned as to the reason for the detention of the containers, he replied, "You pay for two and you 'thiefing' out the other two 40-foot containers."
Khan went on to say that this statement by the Commissioner was evidently made because the Commissioner was not aware that the correction had been made on the entry form.
The plaintiff declared that on December 16, 2002, the Commissioner of Customs and Trade Administration again falsely accused him of wanting to deny payment to the Customs and of attempting to defraud the Government of millions of dollars in duties.
The plaintiff is alleging that the further examination of the goods was deliberately slow and lasted one week. He described the exercise as "maximum administrative delay" in releasing the containers, which caused the Company to suffer loss and damage totalling $9,080,000.
The plaintiff is claiming (a) Damages in excess of $50,000 for unlawful detention of the plaintiff's four 40-foot containers with goods therein whereby the plaintiff has been damnified.