Trinidad-based event promoter Jacho Entertainment Limited has filed a civil lawsuit against Jamaican dancehall star Vybz Kartel over the abrupt cancellation of the One Caribbean Music Festival, which was scheduled for May 31, 2025.
The matter was filed on Tuesday in the High Court of Justice and alleges breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and defamation, among other claims. Jacho Entertainment is seeking damages in excess of TT$7.3 million (approximately US $1.07 million), along with the recovery of US$1.1 million already paid to the artist under a performance agreement.
According to court filings, Jacho Entertainment entered into a written contract with Palmer on November 22, 2024, under which he agreed to headline the festival for a fee of US$1.35 million, payable in four instalments. The event was originally scheduled for February 28, 2025, but was later postponed to May 31, reportedly with the knowledge and involvement of the artist’s management team.
The promoter claims that by May 29, approximately 81 per cent of the agreed fee had been paid, leaving a balance of US$250,000. Court documents state that the outstanding amount was to be settled upon the artist’s arrival in Trinidad and Tobago, and that while temporary foreign exchange constraints affected timing, the funds were available on the day of the event.
The lawsuit alleges that Palmer failed to board his scheduled flight to Trinidad on May 30, and that his representatives subsequently demanded full payment before arrival — a condition Jacho Entertainment says was not required under the contract. On the day of the festival, the artist announced the cancellation publicly via media interviews and social media, without issuing the formal written notice stipulated in the agreement.
Jacho Entertainment said the last-minute cancellation caused significant disruption, as patrons had already entered the venue or travelled from across Trinidad and Tobago and the wider Caribbean. The company said it was forced to halt the event, issue emergency announcements and implement crowd-control measures to ensure public safety.
The promoter claims it assumed responsibility for refunds, logistics and public communication in the aftermath, absorbing substantial costs related to venue hire, staffing, security and technical production. Thousands of ticket holders were reportedly affected, and Jacho Entertainment says it suffered reputational damage as public narratives emerged assigning blame for the failed event.
In its filing, the company further alleges that statements made by Palmer on social media following the cancellation falsely portrayed the promoter as having failed to meet payment obligations, exposing the company to public ridicule and damaging relationships with sponsors and industry partners.
The lawsuit also states that Jacho Entertainment attempted to resolve the dispute through correspondence and proposed alternative arrangements, including mediation and future engagements, but received no substantive response. Legal action was pursued after months of unsuccessful settlement efforts.
Jacho Entertainment is seeking the return of all monies paid, special and general damages, an injunction restraining further alleged defamatory statements, as well as interest and legal costs. The company is being represented by Quantum Legal, with attorney-at-law CJ Williams leading the legal team.
No defence has yet been filed.
In June 2025, Jacho Entertainment head Odane Anderson told Guardian Media that the fallout from the failed concert left him under severe financial pressure, claiming he borrowed heavily to finance the show and was struggling to repay investors and service providers.
“Kartel said the fans get robbed, his supporters get robbed. I get robbed too,” Anderson said at the time, adding that he feared for his safety due to unpaid debts.
Vybz Kartel addressed the matter briefly on Sunday via Instagram, maintaining that the promoter failed to meet contractual payment terms.
“I am aware of public comments regarding the cancellation of the Trinidad performance,” the entertainer wrote. “My position is simple and unchanged: the performance agreement required payment of the full agreed fee in advance. That payment was not completed. As the matter is now before the appropriate legal forum, I will not be commenting.”
