(Trinidad Express) Form-er chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar has emerged as the victor in an almost-eight-year legal battle between herself and the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) over her “forced” resignation as a High Court judge in 2017.
This comes as five law lords at the Privy Council in London, England, yesterday morning, dismissed an appeal brought by the JLSC, which contended that Ayers-Caesar had willfully tendered the resignation to then-president Anthony Carmona, just two weeks after she was appointed to the position.
Now that the final appeal has been determined, the local courts will now have to determine the quantum of compensation that is to be awarded to Ayers-Caesar for breaches to the constitutional rights under section 4 of the Constitution.
Not just that, but she will also have to be paid the salaries owed to her since her appointment on April 12, 2017. This is because, given the ruling, for the duration of time the matter had been before the courts, Ayers-Caesar remained a legitimate member of the High Court Bench.
Hearing the final appeal were Lords Reed, Hodge, Stephens, Lady Rose and Lady Simler.
While the judgment, which was written by Lord Reed stated that the panel did not agree with some of the findings of the local Court of Appeal, it was in agreement with the overall decision that the JLSC’s appeal had to be dismissed.
Essentially, Privy Council found that Ayer-Caesar’s resignation was influenced by chair of the JLSC, Chief Justice Ivor Archie, after she was informed that she may be made to face disciplinary proceedings if she did not withdraw her appointment and return to the Magistracy to complete the part-heard matters she had left behind upon her appointment to the Bench.
“What the Chief Justice told the claimant placed her under pressure to resign, as the implicit alternative of a disciplinary enquiry – ‘effectively the equivalent of impeachment proceedings…,”read the judgment.
It went on to add that such proceedings would have been damaging to her professional and personal reputation and to her standing among her colleagues.
“It is unsurprising that she responded by agreeing to resign,” the judgment read.
What led to the resignation letter being tendered was a series of meetings Ayers-Caesar had with Archie following her appointment to the Bench after it came to Archie’s attention that the former chief magistrate had left behind 53 incomplete cases at the Port of Spain Magistrates’ Court.
Ayers-Caesar had informed Archie, prior to her appointment, that there were only 28 cases on her docket. Based on the evidence, this information was obtained by Ayers-Caesar from administrative court staff at the Magistrates’ Court.
At first instance, then-High Court judge David Harris had found that Ayers-Caesar was not forced into tendering the resignation letter.
In October 2022, however, an Appeal Court panel comprising Justices Allan Mendonca, Nolan Bereaux and Alice Yorke-Soo Hon set aside that judgment after finding that she was pressured and “tricked” by Archie who allegedly threatened that if she did not resign, her appointment would be revoked by Carmona.
Ayers-Caesar was represented by King’s Counsel Peter Knox, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, SC, Ronnie Bissessar, SC, Robert Strang and Varin Gopaul-Gosine; while the JLSC was represented by Ian Benjamin, SC, Ian Roach and Tamara Toolsie.
