PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad, CMC – Finance Minister Colm Imbert has welcomed the decision of the High Court to dismiss an injunction that sought to postpone the implementation of the Trinidad and Tobago Revenue Authority (TTRA) by August.
“After weighing the relative risks, the Court ruled that the Government should not be restrained from doing its duty to the public,” Imbert wrote on his Twitter page.
Justice Betsy Ann Lambert-Peterson on Monday night refused to grant the injunction filed by a Customs officer Terrisa Dhora that would have postponed the Keith Rowley government from moving ahead with plans to establish the TTRA incorporating the Customs and Excise Division (CED) and the Inland Revenue Division (IRD).
“After weighing the relative risks in granting or refusing the interim relief sought, I have concluded that the Defendant should not be restrained, even by interim relief, from exercising its statutory powers or doing its duty towards the public at large,” Justice Lambert-Peterson said.
She said that Dhoray’s challenge over the validity of the move was not so “firmly based” to justify the injunction and that Dhoray’s lawyers failed to prove that she would suffer irreparable harm without the injunction in place.
“To grant interim relief in the circumstances presented by the parties is likely to do more harm than good since the Defendant’s case appears stronger than that of the Claimant.”
Dhoray filed the injunction application on May 8 to stop the implementation of section 18 of the TTRA Act, which deals with the enforcement division of the TTRA.
The application contends this forces IRD and the Customs and Excise Division employees to decide by August 1 whether they want to join the TTRA. Dhoray’s challenge to the constitutionality of the TTRA was filed on July 19, 2022.
By legal notice on April 14, President Christine Kangaroo proclaimed certain sections of the TTRA with effect from May 1.
The injunction application sought to have section 18 stayed pending the hearing and determination of the constitutional claim, as well as an order suspending the date of operationalization of the TTRA.
During his submissions, former attorney general Anand Ramlogan SC referred to affidavits filed by an “expert witness” for the State.
Based on what was stated in the affidavit and that of the finance minister, Ramlogan pointed out that the Government wanted to make the replacement in an attempt to obtain further tax revenue.
“It is not the TTRA that they just want to implement. The reason for doing so is to receive more tax revenue,” said Ramlogan, adding that the Finance Minister “is a puppet master, and the strings are attached to his fingers.”
But Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes urged the High Court to refuse the application for injunctive relief, adding that the question is whether there was even a serious issue to be tried in the first place.
He questioned what prejudice would be suffered by the claimants if the Act were to come into force.
“This is a case where they are asking the court to suspend the operation of legislation. It is in force until the court makes an order that it is unconstitutional,” Mendes said, adding, “You are not allowed to guess second Parliament’s intention in passing the act.”
Mendes had also argued that if staff decide on their future employment based on the legislation, they would be reinstated if Dhoray eventually succeeds in her substantive case.
and then 