Firm awarded compensation for government delay

A company was awarded Lm2,000 in compensation by Mr Justice Geoffrey Valenzia after it resulted that a violation of its fundamental human rights had occurred.

San Blas Ltd had filed a constitutional application against the Commissioner of Lands and the Director Estates Management.

It claimed that land that it owned at Victoria had been expropriated in 1989 when a declaration was published claiming that the land was required for a public purpose. The government took actual possession of the land in 1991.

However, although the company had, by means of two judicial letters filed in 2002, accepted the Lm92,500 it had been offered by way of compensation, it had not yet received any reply from respondents.

Neither had the deed of acquisition and payment been effected.

This, the company said, was in violation of its fundamental human right to freedom from deprivation of property without compensation and it requested the court to grant it a remedy, including that of ordering respondents to finalise the public deed of transfer of the land and payment of compensation.

In his judgment, Mr Justice Valenzia noted that respondents had agreed with the company's statement of the facts but had pleaded that there was no violation of the company's fundamental human right as the delay was due to administrative problems.

San Blas Ltd's complaint was solely about the delay in the finalising of the transfer and in the payment of the price together with interest. The court had therefore to decide upon whether the lapse of time since the expropriation had led to a violation of the company's rights.

Respondents, like every other government department, were bound to organise their systems so as to be compatible with the provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights. This law also provided that the state was responsible for delays that were attributable to its administrative or judicial authorities.

As a result, respondents' plea that delays were caused by administrative problems could not excuse them from responsibility. On the contrary, this could be a cause of the violation of the company's rights.

Mr Justice Valenzia added that 14 years had elapsed since the expropriation and the company still had no assurance that the final transfer would take place.

This period of time was too long, particularly when one considered that the land in question had been split into plots and sold to third parties.

The court therefore concluded that the company's fundamental human rights had been violated and that the company was entitled to compensation.

Mr Justice Valenzia ordered respondents to pay the company Lm2,000 in compensation.

The court also ordered that the public deed of transfer of the land together with payment of the Lm92,500 with interest at five per cent was to take place within one month. The interest was to run from the date of the taking of possession of the land by respondents until final payment.