Cable company to pay Flow for stolen cables

Published: Friday | March 2, 2012 Comments 0

Barbara Gayle, Staff Reporter

Mars Cable Vision Ltd in Mandeville, Manchester, has been ordered by the Supreme Court to pay US$25,000 with interest for 22,000 feet of cable that was stolen from telecommunications provider Columbus Communications Jamaica Ltd which trades as Flow.

Flow had sued Mars Cable Vision, seeking damages for conversion of cables that were stolen from its property in May 2009.

After the cables were stolen, Flow sent two of its workers to conduct investigations into the ownership of certain QR 860 cables that were seen along utility poles in the Christiana area of Manchester.

The defendant is a provider of telecommunications services and also the operator of a shop on Main Street, Christiana.

The workers discovered that the cables belonged to Flow because of a special identification mark on them.

Following the discovery, Flow, which was represented by attorney-at-law Garth McBean, filed a suit against Mars Cable Vision.

Supreme Court judge Bertram Morrison heard evidence in the matter and ordered the defendant to pay special damages of US$25,000 for the theft of the cables.

Inability to refute evidence

The owner of the defendant company contended that QR 860 cables were not the peculiar exclusive property of Flow as he had purchased such cables from abroad.

Morrison, in ruling in favour of Flow, said "the singular and critical deficiency" which the defendant's case suffered was its inability to refute the presence of Flow's identification number on the cables.

The judge pointed out that the defendant did not even attempt to confirm or refute Flows' QR cable identification number or the footage of the cable.

The defendant was also ordered to pay Flow's legal costs and interest on the US$25,000 at six per cent from May 6, 2009 to February 28, 2012.

barbara.gayle@gleanerjm.com

 

 


Share |

The comments on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.
The Gleaner reserves the right not to publish comments that may be deemed libelous, derogatory or indecent. Please keep comments short and precise. A maximum of 8 sentences should be the target. Longer responses/comments should be sent to "Letters of the Editor" using the feedback form provided.
blog comments powered by Disqus