Warns Quarry Company Limited and another (Appellants) v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago and another (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2025/0023

Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

Parties

Appellant(s)

WARNS QUARRY COMPANY LIMITED

PRES-T-CON 2021 LIMITED

Respondent(s)

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

Issue

Did the Court of Appeal misapply the test for seeking an interim injunction in constitutional motions / cases.

Facts

In December 2023, during the course of an investigation, officers of the Trinidad and Tobago police service arrested and charged a number of individuals allegedly involved in carrying out mining activities without a license. The police seized items of moveable property, including excavators and equipment, and took possession of immoveable property. In August 2024, the appellants brought an application for an interim injunction on the basis that their constitutional right to enjoyment of property had been violated. The High Court refused that application by its order dated 21 August 2024. The police thereafter returned certain items of moveable property and gave up possession of the immoveable property. In November 2024, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appellants’ appeal on the basis that the trial judge had considered the correct test for the grant of interim injunction and that the other grounds raised had become academic upon the return of the property in question. The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal. The appellants now seek special leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Date of issue

28 March 2025

Case origin

PTA

Permission to Appeal

Justices

Lord Reed

Lord Richards

Lady Simler

Permission to Appeal decision date

30 July 2025

Permission to Appeal decision

Refused

An appeal does not lie as of right. Special leave to appeal is refused as the appeal does not raise an arguable point of law.

Back to top