By Mark DaCosta- The Full Court has ruled decisively in the Government’s favour, lifting five protective orders that had barred the Ministry of Health from entering the Georgetown Paediatric and Maternal Hospital and New Amsterdam Hospital Campus sites, clearing the way for the State to reclaim possession of the properties, containers and equipment even as a €45.3 million payment dispute with Austrian contractor VAMED Engineering GmbH heads to international arbitration.
VAMED has now taken the fight to the Court of Appeal, alleging that the Ministry has since moved onto both sites and begun interfering with tens of millions of euros’ worth of its property, and is seeking an urgent stay of the Full Court’s order.
For a nation that watched the sod-turning ceremonies at Goedverwagting and New Amsterdam with genuine excitement, the unravelling of the partnership has been sobering.
What began in 2018 as a bilateral understanding between Guyana and Austria, underwritten by roughly €160 million in United Kingdom export finance and hailed as Guyana’s largest-ever public health investment, has degenerated into a courtroom battle over unpaid invoices, seized containers and the limits of the State’s power over foreign investors.
The origins of the quarrel lie in money.
VAMED maintains that it completed and had certified “substantial works” on both the 256-bed mothers’ and children’s hospital and the 150-bed New Amsterdam facility, yet was never paid. Through its attorney, C.A. Nigel Hughes of Hughes, Fields and Stoby, the company put the outstanding sum at €45.3 million, while noting that the Government’s own supervising engineer had independently estimated the State’s indebtedness at approximately €37.94 million.
Compounding matters, Hughes disclosed in July that UniCredit’s loan facility to Guyana, guaranteed by UK Export Finance and allowing borrowing at roughly one per cent annually, lapsed in November 2025 after the Government failed to renew it despite prompting from both lenders.
VAMED says the lapse stripped away the payment security underpinning the contract.
The Ministry of Health has presented a different account, maintaining that VAMED fell behind schedule, missed milestones and failed to keep pace with the works required.
Full Court Overturns Protective Orders, Clearing State Takeover
With no resolution in sight, VAMED announced in mid-July that it would commence international arbitration in Guyana under the rules of the Paris-based International Chamber of Commerce.
Both contracts contain arbitration clauses. Hughes said his client preferred a formal tribunal rather than a public dispute, stating that “the rule of law and contractual accountability require these issues to be determined in a formal and impartial process.”
Tensions nevertheless escalated on the ground.
VAMED alleged that on July 28, the Ministry, contrary to an earlier undertaking by the Attorney General, moved onto the Ogle and New Amsterdam sites and forced the contractor’s private security firm to vacate.
VAMED then sought emergency protection from the High Court.
On August 6, Justice Renita Singh declined to grant the sweeping conservatory and restraining orders sought by VAMED, but issued five narrower preservation orders directing both sides to leave the sites and leave untouched the 52 shipping containers of equipment at the Georgetown location, as well as the contractor’s documents and designs pending arbitration.
VAMED says the containers alone hold equipment worth more than €32 million.
Justice Singh also formally referred the payment dispute to arbitration, a decision neither side has challenged.
The Attorney General’s Chambers, led by Mohabir Anil Nandlall SC, appealed the preservation orders.
On September 22, the Full Court, comprising Chief Justice Navindra Singh and Justice Zamilla Ally-Seepaul, sided with the State.
The Attorney General’s Chambers subsequently quoted the judges as finding that “the Preservation Orders cannot stand” because they were “inconsistent with the Learned Trial Judge’s findings” and their legal foundation was inadequately established.
Much of the ruling turned on Section 16 of the State Liability and Proceedings Act, which generally shields the Government from injunctions in civil proceedings.
The court found that the prohibition could not be circumvented by describing orders regulating the State’s conduct as preservation orders or by relying on the Civil Procedure Rules.
The judges also found that the orders lacked proper grounding in the Arbitration Act 2024, which permits courts to grant interim protective measures in support of pending arbitrations.
The Full Court left undisturbed the refusal of the original conservatory orders and the referral of the payment dispute to arbitration, while ordering VAMED to pay G$500,000 in costs.
The Attorney General’s Chambers said the ruling means the Ministry of Health is now cleared to take possession of the sites, containers, equipment and associated construction materials and proceed with the projects.
VAMED Appeals as Contractor Claims Equipment Is Being Interfered With
VAMED has rejected that outcome and has taken its case to the Court of Appeal, seeking an urgent stay.
In papers filed with the appellate court and supported by an affidavit from employee Aaron Heward Mills, the contractor alleges that Ministry personnel have moved onto both sites and begun “removing, opening, and interfering with” its cranes, generators, containers and other materials.
The company describes the alleged interference as “ongoing and irreparable”, arguing that once its property is dispersed it cannot necessarily be restored to its original condition or location.
Hughes is also challenging the Full Court’s interpretation of the preservation orders, arguing that there is a distinction between an injunction restraining the State and an order preserving the status quo pending arbitration.
Whether that argument will persuade the Court of Appeal remains to be determined.
For now, the Government has control of the hospital sites and the equipment, while VAMED continues its legal challenge.
Meanwhile, the two long-promised hospitals remain at the centre of a dispute that has moved from a major international development project to a complex legal battle over payment, contractual obligations, government authority and the future of critical public health infrastructure.
The eventual arbitration could determine not only how much, if anything, Guyana owes VAMED, but also the financial consequences of a partnership that was once presented as a landmark investment in the country’s healthcare system.
