Court of Appeal refuses SkyBahamas’ Privy Council bid

Court of Appeal refuses SkyBahamas’ Privy Council bid

“Loss of use” damages to be retried in the Supreme Court

NASSAU, BAHAMAS — The Court of Appeal has refused to give leave to SkyBahamas to appeal to the Privy Council level over nearly $500,000 it was ordered to pay Southern Air Limited following an aircraft collision in 2009.

Attorney Wayne Munroe, QC, represented Southern Air.

Marco Turnquest and Chizelle Cargill represented SkyBahamas.

Court of Appeal Justices Sir Michael Barnett, Roy Jones and Justice Milton Evans ruled on the matter.

In its ruling, the appellate court noted “this is really not a matter that needs to trouble the Privy Council”.

On June 1, 2009, an aircraft owned by JODA LLC and operated by Southern Air collided with SkyBahamas’ aircraft, sustaining damage.

SkyBahamas accepted liability for the incident, but disputed Southern Air’s damages claims.

An assessment of damages was carried out and an order was made in September 2017 that SkyBahamas Airlines pay Southern Air just $497,954.22 in damages for negligence.

The breakdown of the damages included $76,099.22 for repairs to the aircraft; $141,315 diminution in value of the aircraft; and $280,540 in loss of opportunity and loss of use of the aircraft.

SkyBahamas appealed against the Registrar Newton’s order.

The matter was dismissed for non-appearance of SkyBahamas or its counsel.

The company sought to have the appeal restored and was successful via the appellate court.

In the ruling, the appellate court made clear that it was the order of the court that the issue of the “loss of use” be subject to a rehearing by the Supreme Court.

“At that rehearing, all matters relating to the loss of use are subject to the determination by the trier of that issue and that they are not bound by any order made by the previous Registrar in relation to that issue and that issue is to be determined de novo by the trier dealing with the rehearing the issue of loss of use,” read the ruling.

“For those reasons, we are satisfied that there is really no basis for this matter going to the Privy Council.

“To the extent that there was any ambiguity in our order, this ruling should clarify any ambiguity that may exist with respect to that matter.

“We accept the views expressed by Mr Munroe that, at most, he can say is that it was open to the new trier of fact to adopt the findings made by the previous trier of fact, but that they are not bound to do so, and there is nothing in our ruling that should be suggested that the new trier of fact is bound by any findings with respect to loss of use made by the earlier registrar who heard the application in the first instance.”

About Royston Jones Jr.

Royston Jones Jr. is a senior digital reporter and occasional TV news anchor at Eyewitness News. Since joining Eyewitness News as a digital reporter in 2018, he has done both digital and broadcast reporting, notably providing the electoral analysis for Eyewitness News’ inaugural election night coverage, “Decision Now 2021”.