A quarry contractor whose contract was terminated by Readymix Ltd in 2013 has lost its appeal in the Privy Council.

In a ruling on February 6, Lords Briggs, Hamblen, Burrows and Lady Rose and Simler dismissed Woodford Construction Ltd's appeal, affirming that Readymix (West Indies) Ltd lawfully terminated its contract after finding that Woodford removed raw gravel (pitrun) from its quarry without proper verification, amounting to theft.

Woodford Construction’s challenge was dismissed at the High Court. On November 22, 2018, Justice Avason-Quinlan held there had been theft of pitrun entitling Readymix to terminate the contract.

The Court of Appeal later upheld the finding of theft of pitrun and dismissed the appeal. Woodford Construction then appealed to the Privy Council contending it was unfair for Readymix to claim theft when it was not pleaded at the trial. The operator’s attorneys Daniel Feetham, KC, and Rowan Pennington-Benton, both of whom were instructed by Freedom Law Chambers, headed by Anand Ramlogan, SC, argued the local courts erred by misunderstanding the requirements to prove a case of theft.

The dispute arose from a November 2013 contract allowing Woodford to excavate and remove up to 1,000,000 cubic yards of pitrun from Readymix’s Bermudez quarry.

The contract required strict verification of each truckload before removal, with payments made in advance. Readymix terminated the contract in June 2015, initially citing a general review of its operations. However, after Woodford filed a lawsuit for wrongful termination, Readymix claimed that Woodford had removed pitrun without following the verification process, effectively stealing it.

Readymix alleged it was not satisfied Woodford verified the actual quantity of pitrun extracted and removed from the quarry between the period November 2013-July 2015.

Woodford was required to pay Readymix $21 plus VAT for a cubic yard of pitrun and excavated approximately 214,332 cubic yards during the period in question.

At trial, Justice Quinlan-Williams found that Woodford Construction trucks had bypassed Readymix’s verification system, resulting in unaccounted pitrun leaving the quarry. The judge ruled that this constituted theft under the contract’s terms.

Justices of Appeal Mira Dean-Armorer, Vasheist Kokaram and Malcolm Holdip upheld the trial judge’s decision, rejecting Woodford’s claims of procedural unfairness. It ruled that while failing to follow the verification process did not automatically equate to theft, the trial judge had sufficient evidence to conclude that Woodford Construction engaged in dishonest removal of pitrun.

In its appeal to the Privy Council, Woodford Construction’s attorneys argued dishonesty was a key element of theft which the lower courts failed to establish.

However, the Privy Council rejected this argument, ruling that dishonesty was implicit in the findings. The Board noted that Woodford’s failure to account for the removed pitrun, coupled with a significant spike in recorded sales when inspections were conduc