Clico International Life Insurance Ltd and another (Respondents) v Eastern Caribbean Baptist Mission and two others (Appellants) (Antigua and Barbuda)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2026/0004

Jurisdiction

Antigua and Barbuda

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) Eastern Caribbean Baptist Mission (2) Hensworth Jonas (3) Jerriann George

Respondent(s)

(1) Wilbur Harrigan (as Administrator of CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd) and (2) CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd

Issue

Did the Court of Appeal err in setting aside the trial judge’s declaration that property owned by one company was beneficially owned by another, and in setting aside the resulting order for sale to satisfy the latter company’s judgment debts?

Facts

The Appellants are two individuals and one company, all of whom obtained separate default judgments against CLICO Life Insurance (“CLICO”), who is the second Respondent. The Appellants applied to enforce these default judgments against a parcel of land, legal title to which was vested in a separate company, Colonial Life Insurance Company (Trinidad) Limited (“Colonial Life Insurance”). The judge rejected the application, finding that the land register showed that CLICO was not the owner of the land. The Appellants then applied for an oral examination of the court-appointed Judicial Manager of CLICO, one Mr Toppin, who gave evidence that CLICO’s assets included certain investment properties which were in the name of Colonial Life Insurance. The Appellants filed a second application for sale of the land, including as one of the grounds of the application Mr Toppin’s evidence that CLICO managed the land as its own even though it was vested in Colonial Life Insurance. This application for sale came before the trial judge, who made a declaration that the land was beneficially owned by CLICO and that this was therefore a circumstance in which it was appropriate to pierce the corporate veil. The Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge on the basis that the Appellants had failed to prove circumstances justifying the piercing of the corporate veil or establishing a trust over the land in favour of CLICO. The Appellants now appeal to His Majesty in Council.

Date of issue

12 January 2026

Case origin

PTA

Back to top