…CCJ rules Appeal Court must hear caseHaving dismissed an appeal filed by the minority shareholder of Toolsie Persaud Limited against the company for the purchasing of shares, the Appeal Court of Guyana has been ordered by the Caribbean Court of Justice to hear the matter.The CCJ announced on Friday that despite procedural errors, the case must be dealt with impartially. Christopher Persaud would have filed an appeal at the CCJ on behalf of his deceased father and minority shareholder in the company, David Persaud, after the Appeal Court dismissed the case. David Persaud owned 33.3 per cent of Toolsie Persaud Limited, a multimillion-dollar company with interests in quarrying, hardware and timber.Being the minority shareholder, he had filed a complainant oppression action, against his brother and the majority shareholder, Toolsie Persaud.After his father’s passing, Christopher Persaud then requested that the company purchase shares of the deceased and that the company be wound up or an interim order be made restraining the sale or disposition of sales.The application was filed under Section 232, in accordance with Section 224 of the Companies Act, which has as its purpose, the restraining of oppressive conduct in companies.While the matter was being heard by Justice Persaud in open court, new Civil Procedure Rules were implemented which allowed oppressive actions to be appealed to the Court of Appeal, instead of the Full Court.After receiving an unfavourable judgment from Justice Persaud, Christopher Persaud appealed the decision before the Court of Appeal. However, the company objected on the basis that the court did not have the authority to hear the appeal.As a result of the objections, Christopher Persaud then went before the Full Court to determine whether this was the case and if it was, that he be given more time to allow him to file the appeal at the Full Court.That case was dismissed and then he filed an appeal against this decision at the Court of Appeal. After being dissatisfied with both courts, Christopher Persaud then placed his faith in the CCJ.While it was raised whether the CCJ had jurisdiction to hear the matter, the Court indicated in the affirmative and stated that, “This Court has an inherent jurisdiction to exercise its discretion to grant special leave in cases where procedural rules have not been strictly followed and where such leave is required in the interest of justice”.Having lost his oppression action in the High Court, the applicant “did all that a diligent litigant could have done to secure his appeal and that every attempt by the applicant to pursue his appeal was met by technical procedural manoeuvres and arguments by the respondents”.Since 2011, the Persaud brothers have battled in court over shares of the company. Initially, David Persaud had asked for an order directing Toolsie Persaud and/or the second named defendant, Toolsie Persaud Limited, to purchase his shares in the capital of the company at a price to be fixed by such a value as may and be agreed upon by the first defendant and/or the second defendant and the plaintiff.