Seaga, Edward v Western Broadcasting Services Ltd et Al

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Judge: N.E. McINTOSH, J.
• Judgment Date: 30 September 2003
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2003] 9 JJC 3001
• Date: 30 September 2003
• Court: Supreme Court (Jamaica)
• Docket Number: SUIT NO. C.L. 1999/S-243

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

IN COMMON LAW

SUIT NO. C.L. 1999/S-243

BETWEEN

EDWARD SEAGA

CLAIMANT

AND

WESTERN BROADCASTING SERVICES LIMITED

1 ^ST DEFENDANT

AND

THE BREAKFAST CLUB LIMITED

2 ^ND DEFENDANT

AND

ANTHONY ABRAHAMS

3 ^RD DEFENDANT

AND

LAURIE GUNST

4 ^TH DEFENDANT

AND

JEFF STEIN

5 ^TH DEFENDANT

DEFAMATION - Libel - Application to vary Order for substituted service - Settlement agreement between claimant and first defendant challenged as negotiations only - Whether binding agreement was reached

N.E. McINTOSH, J.

1 On the 22 ^nd September, 2003 this matter which involves an action of libel, came up for further Case Management. There was an application on behalf of the Claimant to vary an Order for substituted service on the Fourth and Fifth Defendants which had been granted on the 18 ^th of June, 2003. The variation sought was granted and then, as they were quite entitled to do, the Claimant's legal representatives sought to bring to the attention of the Court, the terms of a settlement which they said had been reached between the Claimant and the First Defendant.

2 Miss Larmand, now appearing for the First Defendant, sought to intervene to say that her instructions were that only negotiations had been held and that no settlement had been reached. I found the view thereafter that, in the circumstances, the matter should best proceed on affidavit evidence on behalf of the Claimant, exhibiting documents to which reference was being made, with such responses as may be found to be necessary. That was the extent of my direction. The matter was then adjourned to the 26 ^th of September, 2003.

3 I have one preliminary comment on the Proceedings held on September 26. In future I will be insisting that when submissions are being made to this Court, I hear only from lead Counsel. If it is necessary for any instructions to be given in the course of the submissions it must be done in the form of notes or in a manner which does not interfere with the smooth flow of the submissions being made. Proper briefings should really take place before the hearing.

4 That being said I turn now to the affidavit evidence and the submissions made in furtherance of the management of this case. The Claimant's Attorneys-at-Law seek a ruling from the Court, acknowledging the settlement which they say was reached on the 11 ^th of July, 2003 between the Claimant and the Representative of the First Defendant, Mr. Neville Blythe, who describes himself in his affidavit, sworn to on the 26 ^th of September, 2003, as Chairman of the First Defendant. This they say, was the result of a meeting which was held in the Claimant's office and was attended by the Claimant, his legal representatives Mr. Abe Dabdoub and Mr. Raymond Clough, Mr. Neville Blythe and Mrs. Andrea Messam, representatives of the First Defendant, along with the Attorney-at-Law, Mr. Walter Scott, then representing the First, Second and Third Defendants.

5 At that meeting it is contended, on behalf of the Claimant that a settlement was arrived at in the following terms:

• (a) That the First Defendant would publish an apology acceptable to the Claimant to be drafted by the Claimant's Attorneys-at-Law for broadcast on Hot 102 and CVM Television. The Attorneys-at-Law to decided on the number of times the apology would be published on each medium,

• (b) The First Defendant agreed that it would pay an amount of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000) plus Attorneys-at-Law Costs to Dunn Cox to be agreed between the Attorneys-at-Law

• (c) An amount of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) would be payable in cash and the balance of Seventeen Million Dollars ($17,000,000.00) would be paid by way of the First Defendant and CVM Television Limited providing the Claimant with Volume Discounting Advertising credit on both Hot 102 Radio Station and CVM-TV which advertising credit the Claimant could sell for cash to any third party.

6 In the affidavit evidence advanced on behalf of the Claimant it is further contended that it was expressly understood and agreed that "settlement related solely in respect to the liability of the First Defendant" and further, that it was expressly understood that the offer of apology and amends was not made in respect to any of the other four Defendants.

7 The affidavit evidence also disclosed that Mr. Scott then indicated that in view of the settlement agreement arrived at he would have to cease representing one or other of the Defendants and that the Claimant's Attorneys-at-Law should expect to receive a Notice of Change of Attorney.

8 On July 18, 2003, the Claimant received a cheque from the First Defendant in the amount of $2,000,000.00 under cover of a letter which bore the words, in bold letters, ' WITHOUT PREJUDICE ' and was expressed as follows:

"Please find enclosed, NCB cheque number 103602 in the amount of Two Million dollars ($2,000,000.00) representing an on account payment of the Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) cash settlement as per our negotiated...