VINESH DAYAL, who was locked in an acrimonious legal battle over the control of Jaycees Park in Labasa donated, along with his wife Rachel Shirley Robinson, $40,000. The couple donated $10,000 each on 13 April 2017. On 20 October 2018, Robinson donated another $10,000 and nine days later, on 29 October 2017, Vinesh Dayal donated $10,000 to FFP. The $40,000 donation is legal under the Political Parties Funding Decree. What is not MORALLY acceptable is that rich and powerful families can contribute thousands of dollars from the same household as long as they abide by the $10,000 individual limit imposed by the Donation Decree. It is grossly unfair to the ordinary voters who do not have that sort of money to splash out. Vinesh Dayal is also the owner of the popular LUNCHBOX outlets which first opened in Labasa in September 2014. LUNCHBOX is a subsidiary of VCORP which also owns and operates the Northpole Hotel, Northpole Rentals and other companies in Labasa. In 2016, the Suva born businessman declared: 'The Bainimarama Government has created an amazing social and economic climate and everyone should take their next big step. We are doing just that.' However, there are rumblings from civil servants that although they would prefer to stay at the Grand Eastern Hotel, they are allegedly required by the Government to stay at the Hotel NorthPole.
The Grand Eastern Hotel is owned by the Labasa businessman Charan Jeath Singh
* We notice that one of the litigants in the Jaycees Park court case was PAUL JADURAM, the prominent Labasa businessman and Hotel Takia owner. It turns out from the FFP Donors List that JADURAM donated $10,000 to the FFPHQ.
He donated on 10 September 2014. Receipt Number: 811.
The Labasa High Court Judgment in Favour of Vinesh Dayal's VCORP and Labasa Town Council, re Justice Anjala Wati against The Trustees of Vanualevu Muslim League (1st Appellant) and Labasa businessman Bashir Khan (2nd Appellant)
The Fiji Court of Appeal (29 November 2019) took exception to portions of Judge Anjala Wati's ruling:
"The purpose of exemplary damages is punitive in nature. It is to punish a party for its misconduct. I find that the type of misconduct that the plaintiffs’ have demonstrated deserves punishment. The conduct was full of malice so that Mr. Dayal, a young business man does not come into competition with the tycoons like Mr. Bashir Khan (referring to the 2nd Appellant). Mr. Bashir Khan therefore lied, forged and mistreated Mr. Dayal being fully aware that he had no locus standi to bring the proceedings in the first place. If the justice system does not punish for conduct of this nature, it will condone forging of documents, misleading of Court, and bringing frivolous actions and continuing the same on a fraudulent footing. The perpetrators of the law will not learn that such conduct can be subject to civil penalty too. Mr. BK has not so far been charged for perjury. This is a matter that I will not delve into save to say that his conduct should not be promoted for him to believe that there is no deterrence in a civil cause for that. For such reprehensible conduct a meager sum of damages would not be adequate. It will neither be an adequate punishment nor a deterrent in future as Mr. BK is a financially powerful party to the case." - Judge Anjala Wati