QC argues hospital case has no business in court
(CNS): Doctors Hospital has brought an academic question to the court challenging the government’s deals with two medical tourism facilities but it has no standing to bring any legal case, Tom Hickman QC argued on Wednesday. The British lawyer has been hired by the Attorney General’s Chambers to respond to the judicial review brought by the private hospital asking the court to find that tax giveaways by the government are unconstitutional and its ability to collect taxes cannot be restrained by the contracts.
As he presented the government’s side on the challenge brought by the Doctors Hospital (formerly the Chrissie Tomlinson Memorial Hospital) Hickman said the challenge was merely an academic one because the hospital had no real interest or standing in regard to the issues that were brought up by the judicial review.
Doctors Hospital has claimed that the government’s deal with Health City Cayman Islands in 2010 and the more recent agreement with Aster Cayman Medcity in 2021 are unfair and they give away vast “unilateral concessions” that have created an unfair environment, distorting competition between healthcare providers.
But the government lawyer argued that the court should not be involved at all as the applicant was really seeking an opinion on the effect of the contract and had no standing to challenge its legality. He said the courts should not be offering opinions about the impact of something and there was no legal issue to settle between the government and the hospital.
Hickman even asked the judge to stay the publication of the ruling if he found in favour of the applicants until the government had appealed because, he said, a document offering an opinion in such circumstances would be extremely prejudicial and have damaging consequences for government if the appeal was successful.
The government’s lawyer focused heavily on the argument that the hospital had no standing, that it had brought the case too late even if it were found to have some interest, and that the basis of the application for review was not a proper one for the courts to rule on. But he did address some of the issues that concern the hospital regarding the government’s right to decide who should get a duty waiver.
Chris Buttler, the lawyer representing the Doctors Hospital, had argued Wednesday that the current government should not be fettered by the 2010 deal the UDP government signed with HCCI or the agreement last year with Aster Medcity. Both contracts included a significant number of waivers of the taxes, fees and duties associated with both the development and the operation of hospitals packaged as medical facilities.
But Hickman argued that whatever the government had given to the other facilities under the deals did not directly impact the applicant. If government asked for the duties, this would have no effect on the Doctors Hospital, he said, arguing that legally they were not an interested party in the contract or the waivers. Hickman said the issue was immaterial to the hospital as it would gain nothing directly from the outcome.
He said it was an abstract question about the broader consequences of the contracts but it was not something that required remedy through a judicial review, and the applicants were seeking an opinion on a policy issue.
Hickman said that government has a right to grant waivers and to solidify those deals in contracts. Granting waivers was a part of “government’s strategy” to attract investment. He said that it would have significant consequences on such inward investment and economic policy if the courts ruled that governments could not enter into binding deals with the private sector where it could make tax concessions part of the agreement for periods of time that exceeded an administration.
He said that government was under no legal obligation to publish any details of what waiver policies it might be following. Hickman accepted that this was desirable but he stressed that it was not a legal requirement.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Business, Medical Business, Policy, Politics
The recent concession now calls motives here into question: cover up or not?
The sad truth is that the taxes collected from a whole generation of Caymanians will be used to prop up a private healthcare company, to date to the tune of $164M. Those who favor HCCI should ask themselves if they think they’re TRULY getting “world-class” care and value for money.
More backroom deal BS
If it walks like a duck, and squawks like a duck, chances are, it’s a duck. So what to make of duty waivers and liability exclusions given without any time limit, without the recipient under any obligation to demonstrate they have met their side of the bargain in building a tourist centered medical practice, and clear violation of an undertaking not to compete with local business? And then to do exactly the same thing again, with another “investor “? Quack, quack.
My opinion is that no concessions should be given to any entity seeking to do business in these islands. However, my experience with Doctors Hospital, in two separate occasions, was far from good and I know others whose experience was similar. Their over abundance of expensive “testing” and some diagnosis might also be questionable. Instead of making frivolous attempts to bring down their competitors they would do better to focus more on doctors performance and delivery of patient care.
If the competitors are getting import duty/permit fee waivers (and allowing use of less qualified health care personnel) to reduce their overall costs, then surely that is an advantage Doctors Hospital (and its patients) are being denied. The point is that there should be a level playing field which clearly it continues NOT to be. Why should outsiders get all the tax relief and not the local doctors? Think about it.
I agree about the testing. When I filled out all their pre-consult questionnaires in which I informed them I was diabetic and was taking medication for the condition, they then wanted to charge me $80 to do a Diabetes test!
When you attend HCCI, it is one ‘sales pitch’ after another to panic you into more treatment!
Just a quick question, just what is Jon-Jon looking for in the above picture?
A full moon
Tis his favorite month, after all
Understanding
11:54- Good question. Maybe Jon Jon was looking for a good idea. I’m doubtful he has found it yet. But Jon Jon’s quest useful knowledge continues.
It looks like he’s concerned about a bee
😁🤣
His donkey
The security guard who “didn’t see nutin”?
I agree that the people should not know what they have to pay for the rich to do business! It’s just their money being given away.
When the defences arguments are limited to whether the plaintiff has standing, and in a judicial review case as well where the question of whether governments actions were fair and reasonable is surely everyone’s interest, let alone a competitor to the concessions receivers, you know they are in trouble. When you then double down and start asking the judge to keep his judgment secret until you have a chance to appeal it, the fire alarm is going off.
Its one rich guy bitching at another rich guys business deal because he was smarter or better connected or both.
Leave these idiots to fight it out.
We as the community should enjoy this because hopefully competition will bring down prices.
This is ridiculous. So what happens when a start up Caymanian opens up a business and a foreigner that’s much more connected comes in and opens the same business but with concessions. It’s the principle.
Very good point.
Exactly. And it happens in other industries, not just in health/medical services. E.g. hotels getting concessions and waivers, for buildings, construction and for work permits. Why don’t local developers get those same incentives? Think about it.
Enjoy the fact that there is $164 million that could have been used to fund things like education, the NAU and health care for indigent people. Enjoy the fact that Health City has limited their liability to you for malpractice. Enjoy the fact that if you buy services from CTMH they include a slice of cost to pay for the $ they have to spend on import duty. Enjoy the fact that the Caymanian owned business had to compete with a foreign owned company who got concessions that the Caymanians didn’t get. Enjoy the fact that one of the claimed advantages of allowing Health City in was to provide careers for Caymanians in health care has been displaced by the work permit waivers and wholesale importation of health care workers from India. You do understand that government concessions are not just about the competitors profits, they are a community cost. One which government says is outweighed by the benefits of additional investment in the country – but how would you ever know?
When have prices ever come down in Cayman?
“no legal standing” is the typical argument when you realize you are going to lose, so the best bet is to prevent the individual/entity to get to go to Court in the first place.
Petty obvious health city has been given an unfair advantage. Hence why I won’t use them!!!
Your entitled to choices in life, but possibly one day your family and friends may wish you had chosen a different route.
All roads for SERIOUS medical issues lead to Miami, where the qualifications and experience of the medical practitioners at the well-respected institutions can be fully ratified.
Another QC from England? What is wrong with Reagan or Sm or the numerous other incredible leading litigators we have anointed as QC?
Possible conflict of interest? Quite alot of the local QCs have gone against gov so cant then act for them.
Then again, its probably gov thinking its best to hire some hotshot QC from london.
No one from government wants to be running this case because they are going to lose.
I’m sure Alden could have done it 😂
Or Reshma. Or Sam. World class leading litigators all. Right Franz?
It’s Sir Alden QC to you. There is also Sam QC and Reshma QC in the stable of esteemed litigators, poised to ensure the rule of law and avoid any abuse of power in these blessed Isles.
Of course, all appointments are merit based. Just like selection of realtors and cabinet status grants.
And the Governor grins. And the Commissioner exclaims that the crime situation is stable. And Eric raises his glass. And Franz confirms it is all world class.
What a sickening mess which unfortunately will never change!
Actually I was even Ryder than that.
I missed out ‘perpetually honourable’
How could I have forgotten that?
“And Eric raises his glass. And Franz confirms it is all world class.” My @$$!
What about using Sir Alden?
So how much are we paying for another QC for government again from England?
Going rate about $1000 an hour
Not a cheap expense on the public purse.
Haha, 1000 quid an hour (at least, if he is feeling generous) more like.
Plus first class travel, first class acommodation, meals, etc etc.
No work permit fees though! No permit required. Sickening.
Depends on terms of engagement agreement, which can vary from QC to QC acting as leading counsel.
A good rule of thumb is that a QC is an extremely skilled (and effective) advocate and is compensated in line with their skill set, but are often more expensive than not.
There are QCs and QCs. Some are no more than political hacks, but they can fulfill certain roles too.
‘… an opinion in such circumstances would be extremely prejudicial and have damaging consequences for government if the appeal was successful.’ Exactly- replace ‘Government’ with ‘others’ – extremely prejudicial and damaging consequences.
Agreed! The UDP and PPM governments sound worried – which they should as the current situation (closed door deals with no input from the opposition or tax paying public) is rife with opportunities for corrupt or poor deals being made by any government whilst in power.
Write a fair policy of eligibility!
Mac’s involvement with the Shetty deal immediately raised red flags, and understandably so, given his UDP way of conducting business.
The fallout however is that some of those“special deals” could be revealed.
What about the Son of Shetty deal with Aster? Not just Mac in the frame.
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.