The High Court quashed a hearing linked to an ongoing dispute between intervenors in the Barbados Light and Power Company rate review and the Fair Trading Commission, after discovering that no formal application for the case had been properly filed.
Senior Counsel Hal Gollop, lead attorney for veteran intervenor Ricky Went and his team, had filed a complaint against the FTC over its refusal to compel the utility to release its financial reports.
The case before the court was whether the FTC can force Light & Power to provide information after the commission’s February 2023 rate review decision, which the intervenors argued is not closed. The FTC maintained that the process had been concluded and that it lacks the statutory power to mandate the release of the documents.
A hearing in which the court is being asked by the intervenors to rule on the case was scheduled for next Tuesday, but the court later discovered that something was wrong with the filing process.
The issue came to light when senior counsel for the FTC, Alrick Scott, responded to the court’s legal assistant’s notification to the parties that the case was before the court following Gollop’s application on October 21.
Scott informed the court official that Light & Power had not been served with a notice of application or any filing then and was “unaware” of any application which was filed by Gollop on behalf of his client.
“We have been served with written submissions, but no application,” Scott wrote.
Further investigation by the court officer revealed that, in fact, no formal application had been made for the court to hear a case.
The court assistant said: “On further review of the Curia system, I recognise there is no formal application before the court, only written submissions, and therefore there is no need for the court to convene and hear the parties on what the court thought was a formal application. Please accept the court’s apologies and therefore the date of November 11, 2025 is now vacated.”
In explaining the reasons for requesting the financial information in previous public pronouncements, the intervenors argue that before the FTC gives its final ruling on an appeal before the High Court — against the utility regulator’s February 15, 2023 rate decision — it is necessary to closely analyse the electricity company’s revenue requirement and rate base, especially since rate proceedings are not normally held within five to ten years.
“It is therefore critical,” the intervenors contended, “that every party in the proceedings gets the opportunity to assess the impact on ratepayers prior to a final ruling. Intervenors who represent the public interest are critical to ensure that trust and confidence remain in the regulatory process.”
But through its attorney Scott, the FTC has reiterated that it would not honour the request, arguing there was no statutory obligation to order the release of the reports.
“The FTC will not mandate the BLPC to provide the information or documents set out in your letter for the reasons given above, unless you can provide a clear statutory basis (and I have seen none) for your request,” wrote Scott in a recent letter to Gollop. (EJ)
The post High Court cancels planned hearing of Light & Power rate review dispute appeared first on Barbados Today.
