Skip to content Skip to main navigation Skip to footer

Tajuana King v. Theo Franklyn

The Complainant, Ms Tajuana King of Rock Hall, St Thomas, who is the owner of a Samsung S7 Edge, complains that the screen of her cell phone was malfunctioning and she engaged the services of the Respondent to replace the touchscreen.


Juliet Jones-Best-v.-Desmond-Goddard

The Complainant in this matter is Mrs Juliet Best Jones, the owner of the dwelling house located at 186 Oyster, Atlantic Shores, Christ Church who has a dispute over doors supplied by Just Doors in the year 2011.


Maradona Scantlebury v. Shane Dyall

Maradona Scantlebury (“the Complainant”) claims the sum of BDS $ 1,675.00 as damages from Shane Dyall (“the Respondent”) for the latter’s failure to comply with the guarantee of reasonable care and skill in their contract for the supply of electronic and other services made on May 27, 2014.


Wayne Best v. F B Automotive Arts Inc.

This matter raises some not unimportant issues in local consumer law as to the interaction between the contractual warranty and the statutory consumer guarantee, the extent of the statutory guarantee that attaches when replacement goods are supplied in fulfillment of a supplier’s secondary obligation under the Act and the remedy, if any, to which a consumer is entitled where there is a failure to comply with a statutory guarantee.


Jackie Medford v. Prince Holmes

IN THE CONSUMER CLAIMS TRIBUNAL BETWEEN JACQUELINE MEDFORD                                              COMPLAINANT AND PRINCE HOLMES                                           […]


Kevin Simon v. Electronic on Edge Ltd

In this matter the Complainant, Mr. Kevin Simon, claims damages against the Respondent, Electronics on Edge Ltd; as supplier for failure to comply with the provisions of the Consumer Guarantees Act, Cap 326 E, in particular section 6, which requires the supplier to supply him with a phone that is of acceptable quality.


Lionel Barker v Dr Abdul Pandor

The Tribunal sincerely apologizes to the parties for the undue delay in delivering this decision. The hearing in this matter concluded in 2013 and owing to a combination of circumstances, some within and some without our control, we are able to deliver our decision today only. Please accept our collective apology.


Owen Davis v Ready Con Inc

The Tribunal sincerely apologizes to the parties for the undue delay in delivering this decision. The hearing in this matter concluded in 2012 and owing to a combination of circumstances, some within and some without our control, we are able to deliver our decision today only. Please accept our collective apology.



Ricardo Norville v. David Sealy

This is an application by the Claimant for an order for refund of expenses and damages as particularised in the final paragraph of an amended Claim dated the 22nd November 2012. The original claim was dated 16th January 2012.