Citizens ask full bench to hear appeal for proof of ExxonMobil’s US$2B oil spill guarantee

Mar 12, 2024 Court Stories, ExxonMobil, Features / Columnists, News, Oil & Gas

Frederick Collins and Godfrey Whyte

Kaieteur News – Two citizens, Frderick Collins and Godfrey Whyte have appealed the decision of Justice Rishi Persaud, who determined that the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to summon the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to produce evidence that ExxonMobil Guyana has lodged the US$2 billion oil spill guarantee with the agency as ordered by the Court.

Collins and Whyte, through their Lawyers, Melinda Janki, Abiola Wong-Inniss and Seenuath Jairam S.C filed the appeal on February 22, 2024, requesting the full bench of the Court of Appeal to hear their case. In the document seen by Kaieteur News the citizens pointed out that their application was extremely urgent, given that the operator of the Stabroek Block, ExxonMobil Guyana Limited (EMGL) is continuing its petroleum operations in Guyana’s Exclusive Economic Zone, without complying with Condition 14 of its Permit (for an unlimited parent company guarantee) as a result of the Stay granted by the Judge on June 8, 2023.

They argued that the learned Judge has made it impossible for himself or any other person, including the Applicants who are acting in the public’s interest to see whether Esso- now EMGL) has complied with the Condition of the Stay to lodge the US$2B oil spill Guarantee.

Pending the final outcome of an appeal to stay the order by High Court Justice, Sandil Kissoon, that ExxonMobil Guyana provides unlimited liability coverage for oil spills, Court of Appeal judge, Justice Rishi Persaud had instructed ExxonMobil to lodge a US$2 Billion oil spill guarantee. In their Application for the Full Bench to hear their case, the citizens stated, “The learned Judge demonstrated implied bias, or at least gave the impression of bias, by himself raising the spurious question of jurisdiction before it was raised by either Esso or the EPA, by inviting them to make submissions on jurisdiction, by taking months to hear and determine an application that any competent Judge could have determined upon the papers without submissions, and by rendering a decision which lets Esso off the hook of compliance and makes it impossible for the Applicants (and the Guyanese public whose interests are at stake) to find out whether Esso has complied with the Stay or whether Esso is operating illegally and/ or the learned Judge has thereby deprived himself of the opportunity to ascertain whether his said Order has been complied with.”

The applicants also contend that the Judge’s decision was unjustifiable, unreasonable, erroneous at law, harsh and/or oppressive. They argued, “The learned Judge erred at law, was plainly wrong and acted without jurisdiction in varying his Order and/or pronouncing thereon to rule that the guarantee was to be lodged with the EPA even though the Order does not, ex facie, say it is to be lodged with the EPA and compliance is a matter for the Court not the parties to determine…”

The citizens are therefore seeking an Order varying or setting aside the decision of the Judge, made on February 19, 2024 refusing the Application made by the citizens in a Summons filed on November 1, 2023 for EPA and Exxon to provide a true copy of the US$2B guarantee and an Order that the Application be dealt with and heard on an urgent basis.

They are also seeking a declaration that Exxon has failed to comply with the Order and that Justice Persaud was “plainly wrong” to decline jurisdiction and/ or plainly wrong to refuse to order that the oil company/ EPA do produce a copy of the said guarantee to the Applicants. Fredericks and Collins have also asked the Court for “this Motion be consolidated with that part of the Applicants Motion filed on 5^th July, 2023 for an order for variation and discharge of the said order and/or the said Stay.”