Ramnarine v West Indies Cricket Board Inc.

JurisdictionTrinidad & Tobago
JudgeCharles, J.
Judgment Date14 October 2014
Neutral CitationTT 2014 HC 351
Docket NumberCV 4927 of 2010
CourtHigh Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
Date14 October 2014

High Court

Charles, J.

CV 4927 of 2010

Ramnarine
and
West Indies Cricket Board Inc
Appearances:

For the claimant: Mr. L. Haynes Q.C., instructed by Ms. D. Haynes

For the defendant: Mr. C. Hamel-Smith S.C., instructed by Mr. L. Hamel-Smith

Defamation - Libel and slander — Whether the natural and ordinary meaning of the words published were defamatory — Context in which the words complained of are used — The ordinary meaning of words is adjudged by the mind of the ordinary, reasonable, fair minded reader — The interferences made by the ordinary man — Words used in publication are considered to only have one right meaning — Natural and ordinary meaning must be taken as a whole — Natural and ordinary meaning must not be considered by the court according to a literal approach — Factors the court ought to consider in determining whether the meaning of a publication was defamatory — Defences to defamation — Whether the publication is protected by Justification — Facts must be true and opinions must be correct — Whether the publication is protected by Qualified privilege — Whether the defendant was activated by malice — Qualified privilege based o n interest or duty of person who makes communication — Whether the publication is protected by the defence of fair comment — Public interest — Public apology as required by law — Damages — Aggravated damages.

Charles, J.
1

The claimant was at the material time the President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the body known as the West Indies Players' Association (WIPA) which is the players' representative body of West Indian Cricketers, incorporated as a non-profit organization, and which relies on players' dues, sponsorship and Government subventions.

2

The defendant is an incorporated company which carries on business relating to all aspects of the administration and management of what is known as “West Indies Cricket”.

3

By Amended Claim Form and Statement of Case filed on the 3rd January, 2011, the claimant claimed damages, including aggravated damages, against the defendant for defamation by reason of:

  • i. A media release by the defendant on the 24th August, 2010;

  • ii. A media release by the defendant on 26th August, 2010; and,

  • iii. The cumulative effect of both releases.

PUBLICATIONS AND WORDS COMPLAINED OF
4

It is alleged by the claimant, and not denied by the defendant, that these articles were published on its website on the internet and distributed to various media organizations in the Caribbean, including the Trinidad Guardian and the Trinidad Express.

THE PLEADINGS: THE CLAIM
5

The claimant was the President and CEO of WIPA at all material times and alleged (Para. 4 of the Amended Statement of Case) that on or about the 24th August, 2010, the defendant falsely and maliciously published a media release on its website known as ‘www.windiescricket.com’ and further published this release to media organizations in the Caribbean. The latter paragraphs of the said release contained the following:

“Critically the WICB is proud of the fact that it has honoured every single commitment in the New York Agreement whereupon WIPA remained in breach thereby attempting to keep West Indies cricket in a state of limbo …

  • i) The WICB has paid the legal fees as agreed and has paid the US$450, 000 of which claimant received US$150, 000. Meanwhile WIPA refuses to discuss a new CBA/ MOU and refuses to progress on the arbitration …”

6

The claimant pleaded that in their natural and ordinary meaning the above words (in bold) meant and were understood to mean:

  • i. The claimant personally received and benefitted from US$150, 000.00 of the US$450, 000.00 paid;

  • ii. The claimant deprived West Indian cricketers of one-third settlement in order to benefit personally;

  • iii. The claimant, in negotiating the New York Agreement (NYA) was guided by his own interests and not those of the West Indian cricketers he represented;

  • iv. The claimant engaged in corrupt practices by reserving for himself a portion of the money destined for the West Indian cricketers he represented;

  • v. The claimant was guilty of dishonourable and corrupt and/or immoral conduct.

7

The defendant's media release of the 26th August, 2010 contained the following words, complained of by the claimant:

“WIPA asserts: The WICB in its release further stated that it paid legal fees as agreed and has paid the US$450, 000.00 of which the claimant received the US$150, 000.00”

The FACTS: Mr. Dinanath Ramnarine after initially insisting that the entire amount of US$450, 000.00 be paid to WIPA eventually provided a list of 17 players among whom the money should be allocated and how it should be distributed.”

8

The claimant pleaded that in their ordinary meaning the said words were meant and understood to mean the following:

  • i. The claimant personally received and benefitted from US$150, 000.00 of the US$450, 000.00 paid;

  • ii. The claimant deprived the West Indian cricketers of one third of a settlement in order to benefit personally;

  • iii. The claimant, in negotiating the NYA, was guided by his own interests and not those of the West Indian cricketers he represented;

  • iv. The claimant engaged in corrupt practices by reserving for himself a portion of the money destined for the West Indian cricketers he represented;

  • v. The claimant was guilty of dishonourable and corrupt and/or immoral conduct;

  • vi The claimant wrongfully tried to have the sum of US$450, 000.00 paid to the WIPA, the organization of which he is President and CEO instead of to the players that he represents;

  • vii. The claimant was guilty of sharp, unscrupulous and corrupt practice by seeking deliberately and unjustifiably to have US$450, 000.00 paid to WIPA when the said sum should have been paid to the players.

9

As regards the cumulative effect of the media releases of the 24th August, 2010 and the 26th August, 2010, the claimant pleaded that when read or taken together the words complained of suggested and were understood to mean that he repeatedly indulged in sharp, unscrupulous and corrupt practices.

10

In addition, the claimant alleged that these words, taken separately and together, have caused shame and disgrace to him personally and in his professional dealings. Consequently, he has been injured in his credit, character and reputation and in his professional working life.

11

On the 27th August, 2010, the claimant's Attorneys-at-law wrote to the defendant complaining of the words published and made attempts to settle the matter amicably. However, the claimant contended that the defendant has refused to publish an apology on terms acceptable to him and there has been no agreement on damages to compensate the claimant for injury to his personal and professional reputation.

THE DEFENCE
12

By its Amended Defence filed on the 27th April, 2011, the defendant pleaded that the claimant's position and his role as President and CEO of the WIPA had received extensive media coverage particularly within the West Indies. Further, the claimant is widely known as the President and CEO of WIPA and is closely associated with all of its activities.

13

The defendant admitted issuing the media releases of 24th August, 2010 and the 26th August, 2010 but denied that it did so falsely and maliciously. The defendant averred that the words complained of were published in the context of the disputes between the WIPA and itself, dating back to July, 2009 when the parties agreed to participate in a mediation exercise in August, 2009 in Barbados. The parties signed an agreement in this regard.

14

It was further contended by the defendant that the New York Agreement (“NYA”) executed by itself and the WIPA on the 10th October, 2009, provides the context in which the published words are to be viewed. The said NYA provided for a payment of US$450, 000.00 by the defendant to WIPA in settlement of several disputes between the parties. The defendant averred that in his capacity as President and CEO of the WIPA, the claimant requested payment to the WIPA of said sum. However, the defendant questioned the payment to the WIPA as opposed to the individual players. Consequently, the defendant requested a list of the players to whom it could pay the monies directly.

15

After initial resistance from the WIPA, acting through the claimant, a list was provided to the defendant of the players who were to benefit from the said settlement and indicated the amounts to be paid to each. The defendant noted that four (4) of the seventeen (17) players on the list were entitled to more money than the others and that these players authorised the defendant to pay a portion of the monies allocated to them to the WIPA.

16

The payment to the players amounted to US$150, 000.00 and WIPA requested that the defendant pay this sum to it on behalf of the players. However, the defendant had reservations with this arrangement and asked for a rationale for the list as it had its own position about which players should be on the list. The defendant did not make payment of the said sums until April, 2010 when the WIPA threatened legal action.

17

On the 21st August, 2010, the defendant issued a media release whereby it indicated that the International Cricket Council (“ICC”) and the Federation of International Cricketers' Association (“FICA”) had offered their assistance in resolving the matters between the defendant and the WIPA which were, inter alia, the subject of the special arbitration and that WIPA had refused this assistance. WIPA responded to this by media release of the 23rd August, 2010. The defendant responded to this release by the WIPA by its media release of 24th August, 2010.

18

Consequently, the defendant argued that the words complained of in their release of 24th August, 2010 were in the context of its position that it had in fact honoured the terms of the NYA. As such, the defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT