The Court of Appeal has ruled in favour of CEPEP in a major test case brought by contractor Eastman Enterprise Limited.
In a unanimous decision delivered by Justice of Appeal Peter Rajkumar—and supported by Justices James Aboud and Ricky Rahim—the Court dismissed Eastman’s appeal, finding that the contractor violated the alternative dispute resolution clause in its contract.
The appeal challenged Justice Margaret Mohammed’s earlier ruling to stay the proceedings.
However, the Court held she was correct, agreeing with submissions from CEPEP’s lead attorney, Senior Counsel Anand Ramlogan, that the arbitration clause was valid and binding.
The Court rejected arguments from Eastman’s legal team that the clause was vague or unenforceable, stressing that both mediation and arbitration were mandatory steps before approaching the courts. It condemned the contractor’s attempt to bypass the agreed dispute-resolution process, saying it defeated the purpose of the contract.
CEPEP has noted the Court’s finding that a referral to the DPP was premature but says it remains committed to pursuing justice and is seeking legal advice on alleged fraudulent misrepresentation.
