Last Updated on Thursday, 24 September 2026, 22:27 by Writer
The Full Court has struck down sections of a High Court ruling in a case brought by the Austrian healthcare infrastructure provider, VAM Engineering GmbH, paving the way for the government to take over two hospital sites at Ogle, East Coast Demerara and New Amsterdam, Berbice and continue construction works.
“In short, the Ministry of Health is now cleared to take possession of the sites, containers, equipment and associated construction materials and to proceed with the projects as it sees fit,” the Attorney General’s Chambers said in a statement.
The Full Court presided over by Chief Justice Navindra Singh and Justice Zamilla Ally-Seepaul set aside five orders made against the State by Justice Renita Singh on 6 August 2026.
According to the Attorney General’s Chambers, the Full Court upheld arguments by the State that the Preservation Orders granted by Justice Renita Singh “cannot stand.”
The Full Court reasoned that they are inconsistent with the trial judge’s own findings.
“Their legal foundation was inadequately established and their substantive effect was not properly considered.”
The Court held that section 16 of the State Liability and Proceedings Act prohibits injunctions against the State in proceedings of this kind.
That prohibition could not be circumvented by describing orders regulating the State’s conduct as preservation orders or by relying on the Civil Procedure Rules, the Attorney General’s Chambers said.
The Court also found that the orders lacked the necessary statutory basis under the Arbitration Act 2024 and conflicted with the trial judge’s own findings that there was no urgency and that damages were an adequate remedy.
The High Court’s refusal of VAMED’s applications for conservatory and restraining orders remains undisturbed, as does its order referring the underlying contract dispute to arbitration, the Attorney General said.
The Court awarded the Attorney General GY$500,000 in costs.
The dispute concerns the Ministry of Health’s termination of construction contracts for the Georgetown Paediatric and Maternal Hospital (GMPH) and the New Amsterdam Hospital Campus (NAHC).
The High Court had ordered that the Ministry of Health preserve the GMPH and the NAHC sites, preserve the 52 containers and equipment on the GMPH site and to not open nor interfere with same.
The court had also ordered that VAMED Engineering preserve the 52 containers and equipment on the GMPH site and not to open or interfere with same, and the company’s security personnel only are allowed access to the GMPH site only for the sole purpose of securing the 52 containers and equipment.
The Ministry of Health was also ordered to preserve all contractor’s documents, property designs, plan and intellectual property.”
The Court stated: “This appeal concerns the validity of five Preservation Orders made by the Learned Judge, following her refusal to grant Conservatory and Restraining Orders sought by VAMED Engineering against the Ministry of Health. The central question is whether having refused the substantive interim relief sought on both jurisdictional and discretionary grounds, the Learned Trial Judge could nevertheless make substantially similar orders under the guise of preserving property.”
The Appellant was represented by Attorney General Mohabir Anil Nandlall, Ms Shoshana V. Lall and Ms Prithima Kissoon and Mr Joshua Cullen of the Attorney General’s Chambers.
The Respondent was represented by Mr Nigel Hughes of Hughes, Fields and Stoby.
