Employer and employee fined for lapsed work permit

Worker had applied for permanent residence, court told

A company and an employee were fined a total of $900 on Thursday after pleading guilty to work-permit related offenses.

Advanced Painting Ltd. was charged with employing Wesley Victor Hall without a work permit on various dates between July 28, 2010 and March 14, 2016. Hall was charged with failing to maintain a Working Operation Law permit during that same period.

Defense attorney John Furniss explained that Hall had applied for permanent residence and then failed to maintain the required permit while his application was being considered. The decision had gone against him and he was then faced with a deadline to leave.

The company owner, Edward Manderson Jr., assisted Hall with work during the time he was getting himself sorted out.

The attorney submitted that Mr. Manderson had recognized he had a responsibility to Hall and took it upon himself to continue to assist the man.

Mr. Furniss explained further that Mr. Manderson had been engaged in civil proceedings and so his attention was not with the company for the whole time.

He questioned whether the individual or the company should be charged and Crown counsel Stacy-Ann Kelly accepted that the defendant was the company.

Magistrate Grace Donalds imposed a fine of $600 on the company and $300 on the employee.

Ms. Kelly noted that Hall had been found to be overstaying from July 2010; this offense was admitted and dealt with administratively by way of fines.



  1. This contrasts with a recent similar case where a Jamaican woman was fined, but her apparently local employer was not, and further was not named in court or in the Compass report.

    • I completely agree Roger. What a stark contrast. Here the company and the owner are named personally. In the previous article and comments, no mention of the person responsible. Makes me even more suspicious that it was someone of note, and their identity was protected. Another cover-up. When are people going to speak up about the corruption, nepotism and cronyism that seems to be rife here.

  2. Yes Susan and Roger , I agree with you both . I think that someone need to petition the court to release all names involved in that case , because I am seeing a pattern of this cronyism . That is not right to treat one , one way ,and the other one a different way like we are seeing.


Comments are closed.