By Barbara Gayle, Staff ReporterTWO REAL estate development companies have been ordered by the Court of Appeal to pay $2.5 million to the Fair Trading Commission (FTC) for false and misleading advertisements.
The court found that SBH Holdings Limited and Forest Hills Joint Venture Limited had advertised in newspapers and pamphlets in 1995 and 1996 that purchasers of houses in the Estate Homes of Forest Hills, St. Andrew, which they were developing, would be offered facilities such as a swimming pool, tennis court, a clubhouse and security fencing.
UNANIMOUS DECISION
In handing down the unanimous decision, Justice Karl Harrison (acting) said "The Fair Competition Act is clearly a very important safeguard for members of the public who choose to do business through the medium of advertising. In the circumstances, where representations are false or misleading, a very clear and strong message must be sent to those persons who are in breach of the law."
Purchasers of townhouses in the housing scheme had complained to the FTC that the companies failed to provide the facilities which they had advertised.
The FTC took the case to the Supreme Court seeking a declaration that the companies breached the Fair Competition Act through misleading advertising.
The FTC sought an order for the companies to pay to the Crown a pecuniary or monetary penalty not exceeding $5 million for the breaches.
Justice Wesley James heard the motion and ruled in July 2002 that the companies did not commit any breach, but the FTC appealed.
The Court of Appeal comprising the Honourable Ian Forte, president, Justice Paul Harrison and Justice Karl Harrison (acting), upheld legal arguments from attorneys-at-law Patrick Foster and Katherine Francis of the Attorney General's Department, who represented the FTC.
The court ordered the companies to pay $2.5 million as a pecuniary penalty for breaching the Fair Competition Act, half the amount sought by the FTC. The monies are payable to the Government.
"It is hoped that some consideration will be given by the authorities to the fact that although the penalty of $2.5 million is payable to the Crown, the purchasers in the said development are still deprived of the promised facilities," the court said.
