Michael Causwell Snr. and Michael Causwell Jnr. v Dwight Clacken and LMH Publishing Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Court: Supreme Court (Jamaica)
• Judge: Hutchinson Shelly, J.
• Judgment Date: 17 April 2026
• Year: 2026
• Docket Number: Suit No.: 2016HCV02177

Michael Causwell Snr. and Michael Causwell Jnr.

and

Dwight Clacken and LMH Publishing Limited

JM 2026 SC 28

Hutchinson Shelly, J.

Suit No.: 2016HCV02177

Supreme Court

Appearances:

Mr. M. Maurice Manning, K.C. and Ms. Allyandra Thompson instructed by the Nunes Scholefield and DeLeon appeared for the Claimants

Mr. Dwight Clacken, the Defendant, appeared in person

INTRODUCTION

Hutchinson Shelly, J.

1 The Claimants, Mr. Michael Causwell Snr. and Mr. Michael Causwell Jnr., instituted proceedings against the 1st Defendant, Mr. Dwight Clacken, and the 2nd Defendant, LMH Publishing Limited, seeking damages, including exemplary and aggravated damages, for libel arising from a non-fiction book entitled No Justice in Jamaica, authored by the 1st Defendant. The Claimants allege that the book contains numerous defamatory statements concerning them and that its publication and distribution, both locally and internationally, caused serious injury to their reputations, resulting in substantial distress and embarrassment.

2 The Claimants also seek an injunction restraining the Defendants, whether by themselves or through their agents, from publishing or distributing the book, in whole or in part, in any format, including print or electronic form, both locally and internationally.

BACKGROUND TO THE CLAIM

3 The 1st Claimant has been engaged in the automotive industry for over 50 years. He formerly owned and operated Causwell Auto Company Ltd. at 15 Arnold Road and operated a rust-proofing business with his brother. He and his brother Richard entered into a rust proofing business with the 1st Defendant, their cousin, who was the owner and operator of Equipment Management Limited (“EML”). Thereafter, rust-proofing became the principal business of EML. The allotment of the company shares was two thirds to the brothers and a third held by the 1st Defendant.

4 The 1st Defendant is the author of the published book No Justice in Jamaica, which recounts his business dealings with the Claimants through EML, his interaction with the Jamaican justice system and the impact of those experiences on his life and business.

5 The 2nd Defendant, a publishing and distribution company, was responsible for the publication and distribution of No Justice in Jamaica. The action was discontinued against them on the 29th of July 2017 following their apology.

THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE 1ST DEFENDANT

6 At paragraph 6 of the Particulars of Claim, the Claimants allege that certain statements authored and published by the 1st Defendant in his book, No Justice in Jamaica, are defamatory of them:

At page 70: “To add insult Michael started suggesting that we omit “GCT” on car services as others in competition were doing so. I objected; this exposed me as Managing Director to criminal liability.”

At page 71: “On the first attempt to pay Kappa by instalments Michael suggested that we simply not pay them” (a creditor)…………… “Months later, an attempt was made by our parts manager to have Michael endorse a cheque to pay Kappa another instalment after more cars were sold. Again he objected and, without notifying Michael, I paid this final instalment” …

“Sometime later a group of New Zealanders from Robinson Motors apparently heard of us through Kappa – which was obviously happy that they were paid in full as we had verbally agreed, and had no inkling of Michael's plan to stiff them………”

At page 73: “Soon the New Zealanders started calling me for payments because Michael was not paying over to them for the cars sold.”

At page 75: “I became extremely concerned when it appeared that curious efforts were being made to clear these vehicles………..

At one stage while attempting to sort out the accounts, Robinsons informed us that prices on the invoices were not the real prices but were lowered at Michael's request. On Michael's instructions, they had been shipping the cars to EML with invoices written for reduced values. These values were provided by Michael.

So in order to settle with them the invoice figures that should be used to tabulate the real costs were not the ones used for paying duties and clearing customs. This resulted in the parts manager hastily searching for and destroying some invoices to avoid being charged with a criminal offence.”

At page 79: “As Managing Director of EML, I had a job to do. I had to see the Company on the straight path. I had to preserve my reputation, protect my employees' reputations, and importantly, I had to lead by example. The whispers that emanated from among the staff about Michael's behavior were embarrassing…….

At page 80: “One day Michael called me asking to have EML take over or guarantee responsibility of a bond or loan of US$130,000 for a friend in New York whom we all knew.

It was later that I discovered that this US$130,000 was actually paid into Michael's account at Caribbean Trust to pay off one of his loans that was “called” by the lender. The beneficiary of the US$130,000 therefore seemed to have been Michael and not his friend.”

At page 83: “Meanwhile Basil Cunningham admitted in a meeting of the directors in July 2001 that Michael had been in financial trouble and that after my objections, he diverted some $18 million to Michael and his company Econocar Rentals …. I gathered from him that he made temporary adjustments and hinted that this was used only to permit the books for

Michael as a poor performer to look better when seeking loans….

The reversal was never done, though, and at a later date Michael attempted to claim this manipulation was a legitimate transaction…

At page 97: “After we had the 2002 financials examined by a Chartered Accountant, they turned out to be unaudited and tampered with. In countries where justice prevails, this is called “fraud.”

At page 101 “At least $18 Million false payables were manipulated in favour of Michael and his company.”

At page 110: “Meanwhile our efforts to prevent the plundering of assets outside of the ordinary course of business continued.”

At page 118: “I assumed that renewal of the injunction would just be a formality as had been routine in the past….

Instead, a most bizarre thing happened. In this Supreme Court hearing specifically to continue protecting these funds – the same funds that were exposed by Justice Anderson and protected subsequently by other Supreme Court Judges — suddenly became exposed, this time by Justice Marsh…

In any country where justice is readily available this would never happen, not without a subsequent investigation…

What really happened then? … I did believe someone had an urgent need for this ruling at that time; an urgent need for a large amount of money for the personal use of at least one of the partners….

Justice Marsh's action was ridiculous if not dishonest and I am quite sure that the partners knew this.

At page 114: “The hearing also exposed the fact that Michael's son deliberately altered the 2001 comparison figures in the 2001 Financial Statement.”

At page 147: “And why were some of the books that were definitely not the company books, presented aggressively as if they were genuinely those of the company.”

7 The Claimants allege that the 1st Defendant acted with malice in publishing the defamatory statements and this conduct persisted notwithstanding written notice from their attorneys by letter dated the April 22nd, 2016, outlining the defamatory content prior to the book's launch and distribution.

8 They further allege that the 1st Defendant published, launched and distributed the defamatory words and meanings falsely and maliciously, knowing them to be untrue.

DEFENCE

9 In his Defence filed on July 20th, 2015, the 1st Defendant admits authorship and publication of the book. He denies that the impugned statements are defamatory and describes them as true, fair comment, made in good faith and without malice. He also asserts that the account concerns matters of public interest and is covered by qualified privilege.

10 In addressing the statement at page 70 of the book, the 1st Defendant asserts that he informed the 1st Claimant of ongoing inquiries concerning the sale of used motor vehicles and the application of GCT. To which the 1st Claimant indicated that GCT previously imposed on other companies had been waived and the relevant legislation had not yet been gazetted. The 1st Defendant states that he thereafter requested that the 1st Claimant remit the GCT component of vehicle sales by cheque.

11 In respect of the complaint about page 71 of the book, the 1st Defendant said that Kappa sold used motor vehicles to EML for resale and the agreed post-sale payment arrangements were approved by both him and Richard Causwell. He further asserts that the directors subsequently decided to withdraw from the used car business and declined an offer from Robinson Motors to collaborate.

12 The 1st Defendant contends that the contents of page 73 disclose that he had been informed by the New Zealand suppliers that their efforts to obtain payment or an accounting from the 1st Claimant had been unsuccessful. He formed the view that that EML had become liable for the debt, as the 1st Claimant acted as their agent in the transactions, albeit without formal authorization and the vehicles were imported under their licence. He alleges that the 1st Claimant refused to remit payment on the basis, the suppliers were indebted to him. He said that correspondence was exchanged about these sums between EML (himself) and the New Zealanders between January and September 1998.

13 The 1st Defendant asserts that page 75 of the book merely addresses the reduction of the costs of the vehicles on the invoices at the 1st Claimant's request which he says was deliberately done to attract different duties at Customs. He asserted that the shipment and consignment of cars to EML occurred without his knowledge or approval. He agreed that he had informed Robinson Motors that EML had exited the used car...