Latest update February 11th, 2025 7:29 AM
Latest News
- ExxonMobil paying taxes in Bahamas but not a cent to Guyana
- Canadian company completes airstrip, roads to kick off 5.4M ounce gold project in Guyana
- Hamas threatens to postpone next hostage release, claiming Israel has broken terms of ceasefire deal
- Twelve-year-old girl missing for three weeks
- Guard shot as bandits attack Cummings Lodge supermarket
Blackie’s last hideout…Judge grants $125M for damages
By Dale Andrews
Justice Jainarayan Singh Jnr. presiding in the High Court awarded judgement in the sum of $125M with six percent interest to Norman Trotz, the owner of the Toucan Suites Guesthouse, which was destroyed by the Joint Services during the final hours of Linden London called ‘Blackie’ in February 2000.
The judgement was handed down yesterday following lengthy submissions by Attorney General Doodnauth Singh representing the state, and attorney at law Andrew Pollard, counsel for N&R Co. Limited, owned by Norman Trotz.
Attorney-at-law Andrew Pollard
The judgement, according to the businessman, comes as a relief after years of litigation following the destruction of his property at 223 Anaida Avenue, Eccles, East Bank Demerara.
The government had initially balked at compensating the businessman, prompting court action to recover millions in losses.
On February 8, 2000, members of the Joint Services went to the property to apprehend notorious fugitive Linden ‘Blackie’ London who was hiding there in one of the apartments.
A fierce gun battle ensued for almost 11 hours during which the Joint Services comprising the Target Special Squad and ranks from the Guyana Defence Force doused the premises with gasoline and proceeded to ignite it to force London out.
The Joint Services also used five anti-tank missiles which created huge craters in the walls of the building. In the end, the building was completely destroyed.
The property owner, Norman Trotz, initially engaged the government with a view to being compensated but was unsuccessful. The government reportedly claimed that the building was being used to house a wanted person.
Two years later, on February 15, 2002, a frustrated Trotz initiated proceedings in the High Court. The action was finally heard by Justice Jainarayan Singh Jnr. who subsequently granted judgement.
The court found that Trotz’s fundamental right was violated, that he was deprived of his property as guaranteed by Article 40 and Article 142 of the Constitution of Guyana. That right had been violated by the security forces.
The Toucan Suites Guest House shortly after it was destroyed by the Joint Services during their gun battle with Linden ‘Blackie’ London
The court further held that it assessed the company’s losses at $150M.
It awarded damages against the state and ruled that N&R Co. Ltd be compensated for loss suffered.
The court also awarded cost in the sum of $150,000 as well as interest on the judgement at six percent per annum until the judgement is paid.
The state’s main contention was that the security forces had been acting lawfully in carrying out a duty to apprehend criminals and therefore they were not liable for any losses or damages caused in the course of doing so.
But attorney at law Andrew Pollard rebutted that while the state had an undoubted duty to maintain security, it also had a corresponding obligation to fully compensate citizens whose property the security forces destroyed in the course of carrying out their duties.
Attorney General Doodnauth Singh, in his submissions, also claimed that the state was not liable to compensate the company as the action had been carried out on what amounted to an apartment hotel without the requisite Central Housing and Planning Authority (CHPA).
But Pollard responded by pointing out that if the company did not have the land use permission, CHPA had redress to the CHPA Act to punish the company.
He argued that if the Attorney General was correct then anyone who is found driving a vehicle without a license or for which the fitness has expired could have it taken away from them by the police who could then burn it.
During the course of handing down his judgement, Justice Jainarayan Singh Jnr. observed that it is regrettable that the company had to resort to the court for a ruling.
He stated that the government ought to have compensated promptly after the building was destroyed.
The judge also observed that he was not convinced that the Joint Services had not acted hastily in deciding to destroy the building.
He said that even in countries like the United States of America where the security forces act very promptly upon surrounding criminal elements in a building, they would seal off the property and wait for a surrender rather than deliberately destroying the building.
According to Pollard, his client is extremely relieved that the matter has finally come to an end as it has engaged the court for six and a half years.
Pollard said that Trotz is thankful to Justice Singh and the judicial system for ensuring that justice has finally been done in his case.
But Pollard said that he will not be surprised if the state appeals the ruling.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Are we better off today than we were before first oil?
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News-If you had asked me ten years ago what I wanted for Guyana, I would have said a few things:... more
OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Weekend Cartoon
