‘GBTI acted in bad faith when it closed WIN party members’ accounts’ – court rules  

Mar 31, 2026 Court Journal, News

---

(Kaieteur News) – High Court Judge, Nicola Pierre has ruled that the Guyana Bank of Trade and Industry (GBTI) breached its duty to act in good faith when it closed the bank accounts of members of the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party.

Members of the main opposition party, WIN had taken GBTI to court over the bank’s decision to terminate their accounts owing to their affiliation with US-sanctioned businessman Azruddin Mohamed. The members had made a number of claims against the bank including that of unlawfulness and discrimination.

In separate claims members of the party who were affected by the closure sought declaratory and monetary remedies arising out of the termination of her banking relationship with GBTI. These include declarations that the WIN party is a distinct legal entity separate from its members, that no sanctions have been imposed on the party or its candidates (save for its leader), that the bank’s actions were unlawful, improper and discriminatory, and that GBTI breached duties of good faith and mutual trust and confidence.

Further, the WIN members held that their accounts were in good standing and that all transactions were conducted in accordance with the correct banking policies. In her decision delivered on Monday, presiding Justice Pierre noted that while the matter is not explicitly dealt with in common law, Guyana’s apex court, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) provides the authoritative framework for it in a recent ruling. In its decision of Cara Investment Limited versus Christopher Ram et al, the CCJ made it clear that the common law of contract in this jurisdiction is evolving toward recognition of good faith as a foundational organising principle.

“In particular, the Court affirmed that contractual performance requires that parties act honestly, reasonably, and fairly, and not capriciously or arbitrarily. That articulation represents the starting point for any development of the law in Guyana,” the judge pointed out in her decision. Beyond the CCJ, Justice Pierre noted that the Court has considered a range of English and wider Commonwealth authorities. “While these are not binding,” she said, “They are persuasive and demonstrate a consistent and incremental development of the common law.”

“Those authorities reveal a more structured and disciplined approach to good faith, not as a free-standing, open-ended duty of fairness, but as a constraint operating through implied terms controlling the exercise of contractual discretions,” the judge said.

She continued, “synthesizing the CCJ’s jurisprudence with these persuasive authorities, this Court considers that, in Guyana, the proper approach is as follows. Where a bank exercises a contractual power to terminate a customer relationship-particularly where that power involves evaluative judgment such as risk assessment-the law implies a minimum duty of good faith governing the exercise of that power. That duty requires that the bank acts honestly and in good faith-that is, without dishonesty, bad faith, or knowing misrepresentation…”

Meanwhile in a press release issued on Monday, GBTI noted while it acknowledged the findings of the High Court, it will appeal the ruling which was partially not in its favour.

The bank noted that the Court dismissed the majority of the claims brought against it, including allegations of unlawfulness, discrimination, breach of statutory obligations under anti-money laundering legislation, and claims for substantial damages.

“These findings affirm the bank’s adherence to its regulatory responsibilities and its commitment to operating within the framework of Guyana’s financial laws and international compliance standards,” GBTI said.

However, the bank pointed out that the Court determined that the Bank breached “an implied contractual duty of good faith” in its handling of the termination of certain banking relationships, and awarded nominal damages and costs in each matter.

GBTI said while it respectfully noted the Court’s findings it has taken the decision to appeal some of those findings, remaining unwavering in its commitment to upholding the highest standards of regulatory compliance and risk management, acting responsibly and prudently in protecting the financial system and continuously strengthening its policies, procedures, and decision-making frameworks.

In the case the WIN members were represented by attorney, Darren Wade. GBTI was represented by Stephen Fraser, SC, Ms. Shontel Scott, Ms. Sydney Fraser, and Ms. Shakisa Harvey.

---

• Azruddin Mohamed, GBTI, US sanctions, WIN Party

---