The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has denied a contractor’s application to appeal to His Majesty in Council (Privy Council) in a long-running employment dispute involving workers at the Sandals Resort expansion project.
In the judgment a three-judge panel dismissed George Dexter Tavernier’s motion seeking leave to challenge the Court’s March 13 ruling that held him—not the main contractor—responsible for payments to workers who claimed unfair dismissal.
The Court concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated that its decision was so flawed or incorrect that it ought not to be allowed to stand.
The case stems from a series of layoffs between October 2006 and July 2007 during construction work at the Sandals Resort Hotel expansion project in Antigua. Workers represented by Sundry Workers filed claims in 2008 alleging unfair dismissal.
At the heart of the dispute was the question of who actually employed the construction workers—Tavernier Construction or Kier Construction Limited, the principal contractor on the project.
In September 2019, the Industrial Court initially ruled that Kier Construction was the true employer and therefore liable for payments to the terminated workers. However, the Court of Appeal reversed this decision in March, determining that Tavernier was “in fact and in law the employer” responsible for the payments.
Tavernier sought to appeal this reversal to the Privy Council under two provisions of the Antigua and Barbuda Constitution: as a right based on it being a final decision, or alternatively as a matter of discretion due to its supposed importance.
The Court rejected both arguments. First, it determined the decision was not “final” as required for an appeal as of right, since it merely established which party was the employer, leaving the actual unfair dismissal claims still to be determined.
The Court also found no compelling reason to grant discretionary leave, ruling that Tavernier failed to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal’s decision contained any serious flaws warranting further review.
The Court noted that the threshold required for an applicant to invoke the ‘or otherwise’ provision is high, and determined that Tavernier had not shown that guidance from His Majesty in Council would be desirable.
Court documents revealed that Kier had subcontracted Tavernier through multiple agreements in 2005 and 2006 to construct a superstructure and supply skilled tradesmen for the Sandals project. The agreements required Tavernier to submit names and addresses of workers to Kier.
The ruling brings the case one step closer to resolution, with the matter now expected to return to the Industrial Court to determine the merits of the unfair dismissal claims against Tavernier.
The Court ordered costs to be paid to Kier Construction, to be assessed if not agreed within 21 days.
The workers are always going to suffer in the long run.. you notice when management get fired they get pay one time
And anyone expects a different outcome? Workers are always at the end of the rope
Sandals come on do something about this. Do not ruin your good reputation. Just pay the workers
This case has been dragging on for how long now? Since 2008? It’s a disgrace. How can ordinary people trust the system when it takes almost 20 years to resolve a simple employment matter?
Construction in Antigua needs better oversight. Too many times workers are left in limbo when things go wrong. Government should require clearer employer accountability in all major projects.
Wow that’s a complex matter.
It’s almost 10 years and the workers are still waiting to get paid?
To drag a matter in court for almost 10 years is unacceptable.
They will work it out
It is about high time that some people realize that they cannot reply on the arm of justice to bring any kind of justice to them