IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAN FERNANDO
|
|
- Ethelbert Maxwell
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAN FERNANDO IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION OF THE DISCIPLINARY OFFICER COMPLAINTS DIVISION TO INSTITUTE TWO DISCIPLINARY CHARGES AGAINST THE CLAIMANT ON OR ABOUT THE 26 TH DAY OF JULY 2010, FOR THE TWO DISCIPLINARY CHARGES OF NEGLECT OF DUTY CONTRARY TO REGULATIONS 150 (2) (D) (1) OF THE POLICE SERVICE REGULATIONS 2007 BETWEEN ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE JEFFREY IRISH CLAIMANT AND THE DISCIPLINARY OFFICER COMPLAINTS DIVISION" PROPOSED RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JONES Mr. S. Gopaul-Gosine for the Claimant. Mr. D. Byam for the Proposed Respondent. Judgment 1. The Claimant, Jeffrey Irish, has been charged with two disciplinary offences contrary to regulation 150(20(d)(1) of the Police Service Regulations 2007( the Regulations ): namely that Page 1 of 13
2 he neglected to promptly and diligently carry out his duty as the Adjutant for the Special Reserve Police of Trinidad and Tobago when he failed: (i) to carry out a recognised standard procedure for enlisting by recruiting LL into the Special Reserve Police Service, without ensuring that the requisite background checks of LL and (ii) to carry out a recognised standard procedure for enlistment into the Special Reserve Police by recruiting LL without having him submit an enlistment form ( the Charges ). 2. The Respondent is the disciplinary officer appointed by the Commissioner of Police pursuant to regulation 156(1) of the Regulations. 3. The Claimant seeks against the Respondent an order of certiorari to quash the decision to prefer the Charges against him and an order of prohibition to prevent the prosecution of the Charges on the ground that the decision to do so was unlawful and procedurally improper and contrary to natural justice. By my order the hearing of the charges were being stayed until the determination of this judicial review application. Attorneys representing the Respondent appeared at the leave hearing but failed to file written submissions at the substantive hearing. 4. At the leave stage the Respondent submitted that leave ought not to be granted because regulation 156(9) empowers a disciplinary officer to cause an officer to be charged for any disciplinary offence disclosed by the results of the investigation and that in any event there was available to the claimant an alternative remedy, namely the ability to defend the Charges. With Page 2 of 13
3 respect to the first submission I determined that the Claimant had an arguable ground with a realistic prospect of success and with respect to the second submission that the ability to defend the Charges is not in fact an alternative remedy since the Claimant was contending the Charges ought never to have been laid. The ability to defend a charge in my opinion did not provide for the annulment of the charge nor does it attack decision to bring the charge. In the circumstances I gave the Claimant leave to apply for judicial review. Facts 5. The facts are as revealed by the affidavits of the Claimant. These facts are not in dispute. On or around 5 th November 2009 the Claimant was served with a warning notice pursuant to regulation 156(11) which stated that he was being warned that an allegation had been made against him that he recruited LL (name given) to train as a special reserve trainee having prior knowledge that the said LL was dishonourably discharged from the Trinidad and Tobago Regiment following the preferment of drug-related charges against him. 6. By a memorandum dated the 12 th November 2009 from the Respondent the Claimant was advised of the appointment of an investigating officer to investigate the said allegation. In his final report dated 22 nd December 2009, the investigating officer was of the opinion that there was no evidence support to the allegation. On 8 th January 2010 two warning notices were served on the Claimant by the investigating officer. These warning notices purporting to be made under regulation 156(11) advised the Claimant that allegations had been made against him that he had recruited LL to train as a special reserve trainee and failed (i) to ensure that the requisite Page 3 of 13
4 background checks were completed in favour of the said LL; and (ii) to ensure that the said LL submitted his enlistment form and that he may be charged for disciplinary offences. 7. Thereafter nothing happened until the 26th day of July 2010, when the Claimant, was served with memorandum notifying him of the preferment of the Charges against him pursuant to regulation 156(9). The Charges were in the same terms as the allegations contained in the warning notices served on him in January The memorandum further advised him of a disciplinary tribunal hearing scheduled for 17 th August The Claimant now challenges the decision of the Respondent to prefer the Charges against him. He contends that the decision to proceed with the Charges is illegal, procedurally improper, in breach of the rules of natural justice and ultra vires in that, contrary to regulation 156(3) of the Regulations no investigating officer was appointed to investigate the allegations; he was not served a notice specifying the nature of the complaint and not given an opportunity to make an explanation with respect to these allegations. The Respondent, on the other hand, says that the procedure adopted was in keeping with the Regulations and that in any event, in accordance with the Regulations the Claimant would have had the opportunity to be heard on the allegations resulting in the charges by virtue of the earlier investigation. 9. The questions for my determination therefore are, whether in preferring the Charges the Respondent followed the procedure set out in the Regulations and, if not, whether the Claimant is entitled to the relief sought. Page 4 of 13
5 The Regulatory Scheme 10. Part VIII of the Regulations provides a comprehensive disciplinary procedure to be followed by the Commissioner of Police in prosecuting disciplinary offences of this nature. It is not in dispute that these Regulations, and in particular regulation 156, applies in this case. 11. Regulation 156 provides for the appointment of a disciplinary officer in each division, branch or section who shall be responsible for receiving all complaints against an officer by any person: 156(1). Upon the receipt of a complaint in writing against an officer the disciplinary officer shall appoint an investigating officer who shall give the officer concerned a written notice stating: the specific nature of the complainant, that the matter shall be investigated and that the officer concerned may within seven days of receipt of the written notice give to him an explanation in writing concerning the complaint: 156(2). 12. The investigating officer must report promptly to the disciplinary officer. He has 30 days in the first instance and thereafter he may apply for an extension not exceeding 30 days thereafter he must forward a report of his investigations to the disciplinary officer:156(5) and (6). 13. Based on the results of the investigation where the disciplinary officer finds that: (a) the complaint is without substance he shall so inform the officer concerned and the record of the complainant and of the investigation shall be immediately forwarded to the Commissioner for his final determination: 156(8); (b) there is substance in the complainant, he shall cause the officer Page 5 of 13
6 concerned to be charged with any disciplinary offence disclosed and refer the matter to the disciplinary tribunal not later than 20 days of the date of the charge: 156(9). 14. Regulation 156(11) provides that where an officer finds an officer of a lower rank than him committing a disciplinary offence or receives a report from another officer or member of the public, the senior officer shall warn the officer in writing that he may be charged for a disciplinary offence and shall refer the matter to the disciplinary officer immediately. Where an officer is warned under sub regulation (11) sub regulation (2) shall not apply: 156(12). 15. The Regulations therefore describe two situations by which disciplinary proceedings may be commenced against an officer. The first arises where the disciplinary officer is informed of the complaint in writing by an officer junior in rank to the officer concerned, 156(2) and the second arising where an officer finds an officer of lower rank than him committing a disciplinary offence or receives a report of such from some other officer or member of the public, 156(11). 16. In both cases the Regulations require a referral to an investigation officer. In the first instance the disciplinary proceedings are begun by a complaint to the disciplinary officer in writing. In the second case the proceedings are begun by a warning in writing from the senior officer to the officer concerned and an immediate referral to the disciplinary officer. The Regulations specifically provide that where the proceedings are begun pursuant to 156(11) there is no need to comply with 156(2): 156(12). This makes sense because the matter would already been referred to the disciplinary officer in accordance with 156(11). The Regulations do not however suggest that there is no need to comply with regulations 156(3) to (10) with respect to Page 6 of 13
7 proceedings begun by 156(11). Indeed, in my opinion, the presumption is that these regulations, that is 156(3) to 156(10) apply to both 156(2) and 156(11) complaints. 17. At the leave stage the Respondent submitted that regulation 156(9) applies. According to the submission once the disciplinary officer was satisfied that there was substance in the complaint he was empowered by the regulation to charge the officer with any disciplinary offence disclosed. In those circumstances, he submits, there would be no need to re-engage the procedure as outlined by 156(3) to (10). 18. There is no doubt that this is the effect of 156(9). The real question here is whether the Respondent in fact acted in accordance with regulation 156(9) in this case. If he did it goes without saying that the Claimant has no leg to stand on with respect to any procedural irregularity. In addition the question of the right to be heard does not apply because the Claimant would have had the opportunity to be heard in the investigation which resulted in the charges. 19. It is not in dispute that the allegation that was investigated was that the Claimant recruited LL to be trained as special reserve trainee with prior knowledge that he had been discharged from the regiment for drug related offences. Neither is it in dispute that the investigator found that there was no evidence to support the charge. According to the investigating officer the only element of the charge that could be substantiated was that LL was discharged from the regiment. 20. Insofar as the charges are concerned however the following facts are revealed by the Page 7 of 13
8 investigator s report: (i) LL was a trainee recruit and had been so since the 26 th October 2009; (ii) According to LL around the end of October 2009 he attended the Adjutant s office for a letter to take to an educational institution. While there he was told by one WPC Gonzales that there was no enlistment form on his file and was given an enlistment form to fill out. This form was retrieved from him by the investigating officer on the night of the interview; (iii) As a result of the above the investigator solicited a report from WPC Gonzales who indicated that LL s forms had been misplaced and as a result he was requested to fill out new forms. (iv) No suitability reports had been received with respect to LL. 21. It is clear therefore that based on the investigators report while the investigator found that there was no substance in the complaint the report revealed some basis for the preferment of the charges. Indeed it seems to me that the Claimant accepts this when he says at paragraph 8 of his affidavit: The said investigating officer concluded inter alia, that there was no evidence to support the existing allegation made against me. However, he also suggested that there was gross failure to ensure the requisite background checks were completed by me and Mr. L. never submitted his enlistment form to me and it was suggested that I was to ensure same was submitted. Page 8 of 13
9 22. Under regulation 156(9) what is relevant is not the investigator s recommendations but rather the disciplinary officer s conclusions based on the results of the investigation. If, on the basis of the results of the investigation, the disciplinary officer concludes that the complaint is without substance he refers the matter to the Commissioner and that is the end of his involvement in the matter. If, however, he concludes that there is substance in the complaint he is entitled to cause the officer to be charged for any offence disclosed. 23. The Claimant submits that based on the results of the investigation the disciplinary officer could not have properly concluded that there was substance in the complaint. I do not accept the submission. Indeed the Claimant accepts that the report alludes to some failure on his part. Further the charges being investigated was that LL had been recruited into the training programme by the Claimant, despite the fact that the claimant had certain knowledge with respect to his discharge from the regiment. The complaint therefore included the question of LL's recruitment by the Claimant. It cannot therefore be said that the Claimant had no opportunity to answer that allegation. 24. The question here is not whether I would have come to the same conclusion as the Respondent based on the investigators report but rather whether it was open to the Respondent to come to the conclusion that a disciplinary offence was disclosed by the report. On the evidence before me, I find that there was sufficient material in the investigators report for the Respondent to conclude that there was substance in the complaint and that a disciplinary offence was disclosed. Page 9 of 13
10 25. It would seem to me therefore that if this is all that the Respondent did then he could have properly acted under regulation 156(9) and caused the Claimant to be charged with the disciplinary offences disclosed in the investigators report. In that instance the Respondent would be required to have the Claimant charged with the offences and refer the matter to the disciplinary tribunal not later than 20 days of the date of the charge. 26. Unfortunately while this was done by the Respondent certain other things were also done. On the 8 th January 2010 warning notices sent to the Claimant by the investigating officer with respect to the charges pursuant to regulation 156(11). This warning notice, in my opinion, triggered the procedure identified in regulations 156(3) to (10). Thereafter some six months later charges purporting to be brought pursuant to regulation 156(9) were served on the Claimant and the disciplinary tribunal convened. 27. On the one hand therefore, some 17 days after the conclusion of the investigation process, the Claimant is warned of new allegations being made against him in accordance with regulation 156(11), and on the other hand, seven months after the conclusion of the investigation process, he is advised that the Respondent has acted in accordance with regulation 156(9) and referred two disciplinary offences disclosed in the investigator s report to a disciplinary tribunal. The question is whether these facts entitle the Claimant to the relief sought. 28. While it is clear that the Regulations here notwithstanding the fact that regulation 156(9) does not specifically fix a time frame for the disciplinary officer s Page 10 of 13
11 determination with respect to the laying of charges arising out of the investigator s report it is clear that the regulatory scheme provides for the preferment of charges against officers to follow tight timelines. The effect of non-compliance with time limits under regulations dealing with discipline and misconduct in the public service was dealt with by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Herbert Charles v The Judicial and Legal Service Commission and the Disciplinary Tribunal, Privy Council Appeal No. 26 of Their deliberations on the effect of non-compliance with disciplinary regulations are of some assistance. Of particular assistance is the reference to statements of Lord Hailsham in London and Clydeside Estates Limited v Aberdeen District Council[1980] 1WLR 182 at page 189 where he opined that a court having to decide the legal consequence of noncompliance with statutory or regulatory provisions was faced with a spectrum of possibilities. At one end of this spectrum, there may be cases in which a fundamental obligation may have been so outrageously and flagrantly ignored that the subject may safely ignore what has been done and treated as having no legal consequences upon himself. In such a case, if the defaulting authority seeks to rely on its action, it may be that the subject is entitled to use the defect in procedure simply as a shield or defence without having taken any positive action of his own. At the other end of the spectrum the defect in procedure may be so nugatory or trivial that the authority can safely proceed without remedial action confident that if the subject is so misguided as to rely on the fault the court will decline to listen to his complaint. Page 11 of 13
12 29. In the Herbert Charles case the Judicial Committee was of the opinion that the appellant suffered no material prejudice from the breaches of the time limit. In their opinion the case was at the lower end of the spectrum. The question here where on the spectrum does this case fall. 30. While it cannot be disputed that arising out of the investigator s report the disciplinary officer could properly have preferred the charges against the Claimant. It seems to me that this ought to have been done in a timely manner. In my opinion to bring these charges some six months after the receipt by him of the report does not accord with the timeliness envisaged by the Regulations. If, however, this was the end of the case I may be inclined to say that, as in the Herbert Charles case, the effect of this breach was so trivial as not to entitle the Claimant to any relief. 31. It seems to me, however that by the service of the warning notice pursuant to regulation 156 (11) the Claimant was led to believe that a new investigation was to be commenced based on the allegations made against him in that warning notice. Further the fact that no steps were taken pursuant to the warning notice in accordance with the requirements of regulations 156(3) to (10) must have led the Claimant to the conclusion that no further disciplinary proceedings were to be pursued against him. In these circumstances it seems to me that the attempt to bring the charges pursuant to regulation 156(9) some six months after the receipt of the investigator s report brings this case somewhat higher on the spectrum. Page 12 of 13
13 32. To my mind, the Claimant has suffered material prejudice by the decision of the disciplinary officer to pursue charges against him for the following reasons: (i) the disciplinary offences were disclosed in an investigator s report received some seven months earlier; (ii) by the service on him of a warning notice of new allegations the Claimant had been led to believe that a new investigation would have been commenced against him; and (iii) the fact that no further steps had been taken on that warning notice in accordance with regulations 156(3) to (10), by the end of January 2010, the Claimant would have been led to believe that the matter was at the end. 33. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that to proceed with the Charges, in light of what has occurred, is procedurally unfair and in that context is in breach of the rules of natural justice which imposes a duty on the Respondent to act fairly. In the circumstances the Claimant is entitled to an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the Respondent made on or about the 26 th day of July 2010 charging the Claimant with disciplinary charges of neglect of duty contrary to regulation 150(2)(d)(i) of the Regulations and an order of prohibition preventing the Respondent from prosecuting the charges. Dated this 2 nd day of November, Judith Jones Judge Page 13 of 13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2009-02708 BETWEEN SYDNEY ORR APPLICANT AND THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des Vignes
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MOHANLAL RAMCHARAN AND CARLYLE AMBROSE SERRANO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2011-02646 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MOHANLAL RAMCHARAN AND Claimant CARLYLE AMBROSE SERRANO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JUDITH JONES Appearances:
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND SUMAIR MOHAN
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No: 45 of 2008 BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION APPELLANTS AND SUMAIR MOHAN RESPONDENT PANEL: A. Mendonça,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND AND BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2009-01582 IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE INDICTABLE OFFENCES (PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY) ACT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2017-01240 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO 60 OF 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
More informationThe Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules
The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN KENNY GOPAUL AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. Leads Ms Allison Douglas Instructed by Ms. Kerry Ann Oliverie
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2012-04089 BETWEEN KENNY GOPAUL CLAIMANT AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HON. MADAME JUSTICE JOAN CHARLES Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And. HER WORSHIP SENIOR MAGISTRATE MRS. INDRA RAMOO-HAYNES Defendant
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2012-00707 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between ALVIN And AHYEW Claimant HER WORSHIP SENIOR MAGISTRATE MRS. INDRA RAMOO-HAYNES Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationJUDGMENT. Gopichand Ganga and others (Appellant) v Commissioner of Police/Police Service Commission (Respondent)
[2011] UKPC 28 Privy Council Appeal No 0046 of 2010 JUDGMENT Gopichand Ganga and others (Appellant) v Commissioner of Police/Police Service Commission (Respondent) From the Court of Appeal of the Republic
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY RYAN RAMPERSAD FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. 2015-01543 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY RYAN RAMPERSAD FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND IN THE MATTER OF THE
More informationThe Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board)
The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board) Final Draft Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV NO. 2014-02019 IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT CHAPTER 7:08 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN ACCORDANCE
More informationRULES OF BRITISH ROWING LIMITED (An excerpt from the Rules of British Rowing 2015) SECTION H THE DISCIPLINARY AND GRIEVANCE PANEL
SECTION H THE DISCIPLINARY AND GRIEVANCE PANEL 1. Purpose The Disciplinary and Grievance Panel s principal purpose is to ensure that British Rowing handles fairly and efficiently complaints, grievances
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JUDITH JONES
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2014-02620 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN TERRENCE AND CHARLES Claimant CHIEF OF THE DEFENCE STAFF First Defendant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Second
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2009-01937 BETWEEN PETER LEWIS CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CHARLES MITCHELL APPLICANT AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2008-02391 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CHARLES MITCHELL APPLICANT AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD AND TRINIDAD
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN [1] GENERAL AVIATION SERVICES LTD. [2] SILVANUS ERNEST.
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SAINT LUCIA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL HCVAP 2012/006 BETWEEN [1] GENERAL AVIATION SERVICES LTD. [2] SILVANUS ERNEST and Appellants [1] THE DIRECTOR
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PHILLIP QUASHIE CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PROPOSED DEFENDANT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2009-02981 BETWEEN PHILLIP QUASHIE CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PROPOSED DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HON. MADAME JUSTICE JOAN CHARLES Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between DOREEN ALEXANDER-DURITY. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. 2013-01303 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between DOREEN ALEXANDER-DURITY Applicant/Intended Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Respondent/Intended
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2013-004233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT CHAPTER 35:01 AND
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review NORMAN CHARLES RODRIGUEZ
CLAIM NO 275 OF 2014 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD 2014 IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review AND IN THE MATTER of section 13 of the Belize City Council Act, Cap 85
More informationECONO CAR RENTALS LIMITED GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2013-00852 BETWEEN ECONO CAR RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND CINDY CHARLES GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Defendant Co-Defendant NAGICO INSURANCE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. 2011/4632 BETWEEN VERNON BARNETT CLAIMANT AND THE PROMOTION ADVISORY BOARD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANTS BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationMaking a Complaint Against Members of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants In Ireland
Making a Complaint Against Members of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants In Ireland INDEX Introduction 3 How the Institute can help you 3 Relationship with your CPA 3 Making a complaint to the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN P.C. CURTIS APPLEWHITE AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. #2010-04494 BETWEEN P.C. CURTIS APPLEWHITE Claimant AND THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION BASDEO MULCHAN LLOYD CROSBY Defendants BEFORE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between AINSLEY GREAVES. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. C.V. 2012-02753 Between AINSLEY GREAVES Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationBERMUDA POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT : 29
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT 1998 1998 : 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Short title Interpretation Act
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE San Fernando BETWEEN. KALAWATIE GODEK also referred to as Jenny Godek
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2017-00494 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE San Fernando BETWEEN KALAWATIE GODEK also referred to as Jenny Godek CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER (HEAD OF THE TRINIDAD
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE MINISTEROF LABOUR AND SMALL AND MICRO ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2006-03499 BETWEEN NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED APPLICANT AND THE MINISTEROF LABOUR AND SMALL AND MICRO ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2017-02046 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO RAPHAEL MOHAMMED AND THE COMMISSIONER OF PRISONS CLAIMANT FIRST DEFENDANT AND THE ATTORNEY
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 203 of 2011 BETWEEN THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION Appellant AND ABZAL MOHAMMED Respondent PANEL: N. Bereaux, J.A. G. Smith, J.A.
More information2000 No. 315 POLICE. The Royal Ulster Constabulary (Conduct) Regulations 2000 STATUTORY RULES OF NORTHERN IRELAND
STATUTORY RULES OF NORTHERN IRELAND 2000 No. 315 POLICE The Royal Ulster Constabulary (Conduct) Regulations 2000 Made..... 23rd October 2000 Coming into operation.. 6th November 2000 To be laid before
More informationHealth Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process
Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process The following notes have been prepared to explain the complaints process under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance
More informationCHAPTER 17:02 POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II
Police Complaints Authority 3 CHAPTER 17:02 POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Establishment of Police Complaints Authority.
More informationTHE CHARTERED INSURANCE INSTITUTE Disciplinary Procedure Rules
THE CHARTERED INSURANCE INSTITUTE Disciplinary Procedure Rules Part 1 General Authority and Purpose 1.1 These Rules are made pursuant to The Chartered Insurance Institute Disciplinary Regulations 2015.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN SEUKERAN SINGH CLAIMANT AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DEFENDANT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2008-04470 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN SEUKERAN SINGH CLAIMANT AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HON. MADAME JUSTICE JOAN CHARLES Appearances: For
More informationPOLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT
POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT CHAPTER 15:05 Act 8 of 2006 Amended by 12 of 2011 Current Authorised Pages Pages Authorised (inclusive) by 1 2.. 3 6.. 7 8.. 9 25.. 2 Chap. 15:05 Police Complaints Authority
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry-Tobago) BETWEEN AND. Ms. D. Christopher-Noel; Mr. R. Singh and Ms. G. Jackman instructed by Ms. F.
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV. No.2009-02631 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry-Tobago) BETWEEN VERNON AND REID Claimant HER WORSHIP THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE JOAN GILL Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationBETWEEN CLINTON NOEL AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2014-595 BETWEEN CLINTON NOEL Claimant AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice Boodoosingh Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT 2000 AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO H.C.A. NO. 1688 OF 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE NATIONAL LOTTERIES CONTROL BOARD FOR LEAVE
More informationConsolidated text PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED. The Police Complaints (Guernsey) Law, 2008 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE
PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED The Police Complaints (Guernsey) Law, 2008 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE This consolidated version of the enactment incorporates all amendments listed in the footnote below. It has
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-01420 BETWEEN RICKY PANDOHEE CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND THE PRESIDENT,
More informationAnnual Report
Annual Report 2015-16 Judicial Conduct Investigations Office Royal Courts of Justice 81 & 82 Queens Building Strand London WC2A 2LL Telephone: 020 7073 4719 Email: inbox@jcio.gsi.gov.uk Published: 2016
More informationRegulatory enforcement proceedings
Regulatory enforcement proceedings The aim of this note is to give practical guidance on the likely course of enforcement proceedings instituted by the FCA. Set out below is an overview of the process.
More information2016 No. 41 POLICE. The Police (Conduct) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2016
S T A T U T O R Y R U L E S O F N O R T H E R N I R E L A N D 2016 No. 41 POLICE The Police (Conduct) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2016 Made - - - - 17th February 2016 Coming into operation - 1st June
More informationBERMUDA 2004 : 32 OMBUDSMAN ACT 2004
BERMUDA 2004 : 32 OMBUDSMAN ACT 2004 Date of Assent: 17 December 2004 Operative Date: 1 May 2005 1 Short title 2 Interpretation 3 Application of the Act 4 Office of Ombudsman 5 Functions and jurisdiction
More informationThe Police Complaints Authority Act, 2003
The Police Complaints Authority Act, 2003 Part I Preliminary 1. This Act may be cited as the Police Complaints Authority Act, 2003. 2. This Act comes into operation on a date to be fixed by the President
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL PORT OF SPAIN BETWEEN AND MYRTLE DOROTHY PARTAP MYRTLE DORTOTHY PARTAP
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL PORT OF SPAIN Civ. App. No. S051 of 2017 CV No. 2013-04212 BETWEEN CRISTOP LIMITED Appellant/Plaintiff AND MYRTLE DOROTHY PARTAP First Respondent/Defendant
More informationTHE POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART II THE POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY
THE POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT, 2006 Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3 Act inconsistent with Constitution 4. Interpretation PART II THE POLICE COMPLAINTS
More informationCommissioner for Older People (Scotland) Bill [AS INTRODUCED]
Commissioner for Older People (Scotland) Bill [AS INTRODUCED] CONTENTS Section 1 Establishment 2 Appointment 3 Removal The Commissioner Functions 4 Promoting and safeguarding rights and interests United
More informationNational Association of Professional Background Screeners Member Code of Conduct and Member Procedures for Review of Member Conduct
Original Approval: 6/03 Last Updated: 7/6/2017 National Association of Professional Background Screeners Member Code of Conduct and Member Procedures for Review of Member Conduct The NAPBS Member Code
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION (JUDICIAL REVIEW)
Neutral Citation No: [2013] NIQB 58 Ref: TRE8888 Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered: 23/05/2013 (subject to editorial corrections)* IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS DELEGATED FUNCTIONS TO THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR, TOBAGO HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY AND PERMANENT SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER CAST
TABLE OF CONTENTS DELEGATED FUNCTIONS TO THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR, TOBAGO HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY AND PERMANENT SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER CAST INTRODUCTION 1 TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT 4 ACTING APPOINTMENT
More informationPOLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT 1998 BERMUDA 1998 : 29 POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT 1998
BERMUDA 1998 : 29 POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ACT 1998 [Date of Assent 13 July 1998] [Operative Date 5 October 1998] ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1 Short title 2 Interpretation 3 Act to bind Crown 4 Police
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2013-04233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT CHAPTER 35:01 AND
More informationCHAPTER 370 INVESTMENT SERVICES ACT
INVESTMENT SERVICES [CAP. 370. 1 CHAPTER 370 INVESTMENT SERVICES ACT To regulate the carrying on of investment business and to make provision for matters ancillary thereto or connected therewith. 19th
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando. VSN INVESTMENTS LIMITED Claimant AND. SEASONS LIMITED (In Receivership)
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando CV. NO. 2006-01349 BETWEEN VSN INVESTMENTS LIMITED Claimant AND SEASONS LIMITED (In Receivership) Defendant BEFORE
More informationThe names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed.
LCRO 54/2014 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of [Area] Standards Committee BETWEEN CR Applicant AND
More informationData Protection Act 1998
Data Protection Act 1998 1998 CHAPTER 29 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Part I Preliminary 1. Basic interpretative provisions. 2. Sensitive personal data. 3. The special purposes. 4. The data protection principles.
More informationPART I CONSTRUCTION, APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION PART III DISCIPLINE, DISMISSAL AND REMOVAL FROM OFFICE
STATUTES CONTENTS STATUTE I INTERPRETATION AND GENERAL STATUTE II MEMBERSHIP STATUTE III THE CHANCELLOR AND PRO-CHANCELLORS STATUTE IV THE CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL STATUTE V THE PRESIDENT AND VICE-CHANCELLOR
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Civil Appeal No. P-186 of 2016 Claim No. CV 04374 of 2015 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. P- 190 of 2016 Claim No. CV 04374 of 2015 BETWEEN RAIN FOREST RESORTS LIMITED
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE RODNEY KHADAROO AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO: CV2011-04757 BETWEEN RODNEY KHADAROO AND CLAIMANT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Madam
More informationAN BILLE EADRÁNA 2008 ARBITRATION BILL Mar a tionscnaíodh As initiated ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART 1 Preliminary and General
AN BILLE EADRÁNA 2008 ARBITRATION BILL 2008 Mar a tionscnaíodh As initiated ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 Preliminary and General Section 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Interpretation. 3. Application
More informationNumber 37 of 2009 PUBLIC TRANSPORT REGULATION ACT 2009 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART 1 Preliminary and General
Number 37 of 2009 PUBLIC TRANSPORT REGULATION ACT 2009 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section 1. Short title. 2. Definitions. 3. Expenses. PART 1 Preliminary and General 4. Laying of orders and regulations before
More informationTHE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2014 EXPLANATORY NOTE
THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2014 EXPLANATORY NOTE (These notes form no part of the Bill but are intended only to indicate its general purport) The Bill seeks to amend the Co-operative
More informationEMPLOYMENT AND DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) ORDER 2016
Arrangement EMPLOYMENT AND DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) ORDER 2016 Arrangement Article PART 1 3 INTRODUCTORY AND GENERAL 3 1 Interpretation... 3 2 Overriding objective... 4 3 Time... 5 PART 2 5
More information2013 No. POLICE. The Police Service of Scotland (Conduct) Regulations 2013
2 nd DRAFT 13 DECEMBER 2012 SCOTTISH STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2013 No. POLICE The Police Service of Scotland (Conduct) Regulations 2013 Made - - - - *** Laid before Parliament *** Coming into force - - ***
More informationJUDGMENT. P (Appellant) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Respondent)
Michaelmas Term [2017] UKSC 65 On appeal from: [2016] EWCA Civ 2 JUDGMENT P (Appellant) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Respondent) before Lady Hale Lord Kerr Lord Wilson Lord Reed Lord Hughes
More informationTHE MAHARASHTRA EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) REGULATION ACT, [3 of 1978] 1. (Amended upto Mah.
THE MAHARASHTRA EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) REGULATION ACT, 1977 [3 of 1978] 1 (Amended upto Mah. 9 of 2012) [20th March, 1978] An Act to regulate recruitment and conditions of
More information2015 No HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS
S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2015 No. 1958 HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS The General Medical Council (Legal Assessors and Legally Qualified Persons) Rules Order of Council 2015
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. LAING SANDBLASTING & PAINTING CO. LTD. Claimant AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2012-00691 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LAING SANDBLASTING & PAINTING CO. LTD. Claimant AND DOC S ENGINEERING WORKS LTD Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. CV2018-00517 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION BY WINSTON SUTTON (THE SUBJECT OF A WARRANT OF ARREST) FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER
More informationPolice Service Act 2009
Police Service Act 2009 SAMOA POLICE SERVICE ACT 2009 Arrangement of Provisions PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation PART 2 THE SAMOA POLICESERVICE 3. Continuation of the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DONALDSON-HONEYWELL
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV: 2013-04300 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LAKHPATIYA BARRAN (also called DOWLATIAH BARRAN) CLAIMANT AND BALMATI BARRAN RAJINDRA BARRAN MAHENDRA BARRAN FIRST DEFENDANT
More informationDisciplinary Policy and Procedure
Disciplinary Policy and Procedure November 2017 Signed (Chair of Trustees): Date: November 2017 Date of Review: November 2018 The Arbor Academy Trust reviews this policy annually. The Trustees may, however,
More informationOMBUDSMAN BILL, 2017
Arrangement of Sections Section PART I - PRELIMINARY 3 1. Short title...3 2. Interpretation...3 3. Application of Act...4 PART II OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN 5 ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONS OF OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN
More informationGENERAL ORDER NO. 15
Independent State of Papua New Guinea GENERAL ORDER NO. 15 OFFICERS DISCIPLINE _ (NON_CONTRACT) Being a General Order, to effect discipline in the Public Service in accordance with the provisions of the
More informationJUDGMENT. Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda)
Easter Term [2018] UKPC 11 Privy Council Appeal No 0077 of 2016 JUDGMENT Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda) From the Court of Appeal of the
More informationTAMIL NADU BUSINESS FACILITATION ACT 2017
TAMIL NADU BUSINESS FACILITATION ACT 2017 AN ACT TO SUPPORT TAMIL NADU IN ITS ASPIRATION OF BEING ONE OF THE MOST PREFERRED INVESTMENT DESTINATION IN THE COUNTRY, BY ENSURING ADEQUATE INFORMATION AVAILABILITY
More informationANNEX 4 TO THE ORGANIZATION, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL MODEL PURSUANT TO LEGISLATIVE DECREE NO. 231/2001 OPENJOBMETIS S.P.A. - EMPLOYMENT AGENCY -
ANNEX 4 TO THE ORGANIZATION, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL MODEL PURSUANT TO LEGISLATIVE DECREE NO. 231/2001 OPENJOBMETIS S.P.A. - EMPLOYMENT AGENCY - DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM VERS. DATE PREPARED APPROVED NOTES 1.0
More informationTHE PUNJAB RIGHT TO SERVICE ACT, 2011 ( PUNJAB ACT NO.24 OF 2011.) A ACT
PART-1 DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE AFFIARS, PUNJAB Notification The 20 th October, 2011 No.37-leg/2011- The following act of the Legislature of the State of Punjab received the assent of the Punjab
More informationJUDGMENT. From the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. before. Lord Brown Lord Wilson Sir David Keene
[2011] UKPC 31 Privy Council Appeal No 0101 of 2010 JUDGMENT Electra Daniel Administrator for the estate of George Daniel (deceased) (Appellant) v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (Respondent)
More informationBELIZE DEFENCE ACT CHAPTER 135 REVISED EDITION 2003 SHOWING THE SUBSIDIARY LAWS AS AT 31ST OCTOBER, 2003
BELIZE DEFENCE ACT CHAPTER 135 REVISED EDITION 2003 SHOWING THE SUBSIDIARY LAWS AS AT 31ST OCTOBER, 2003 This is a revised edition of the Subsidiary Laws, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under
More informationProvincial Offences Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.33
Français Provincial Offences Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.33 Consolidation Period: From May 15, 2012 to the e-laws currency date. Last amendment: 2011, c. 1, Sched. 1, s. 7. SKIP TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS
More informationFuneral Planning Authority Rules
Funeral Planning Authority Rules 1. GENERAL 1.1 Interpretation In these Rules: "Appellant" means the party serving a Disciplinary Appeal Notice in accordance with Rule 7.9.1; "Applicant" means a person
More informationNINETY-SEVENTH SESSION. Considering that the facts of the case and the pleadings may be summed up as follows:
NINETY-SEVENTH SESSION Judgment No. 2324 The Administrative Tribunal, Considering the complaint filed by Mrs E. C. against the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on 5 March 2003
More informationFIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998
FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998 IN exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Section 25 of the High Court Act, I hereby make the following Rules: Citation 1.
More informationDISCIPLINARY AND DISMISSAL PROCEDURE
DISCIPLINARY AND DISMISSAL PROCEDURE AIM OF THE ACADEMY To provide unique and enriching experiences for all This policy is linked to: Capability Procedure Equality Policy Grievance Procedure PRINCIPLES
More informationBYE LAW 1 INTERPRETATION
BYE LAW 1 INTERPRETATION Preliminary 1.1 In the interpretation of these bye laws the words and expressions defined in Article 1 and Article 48 of the Articles have the same meanings as set in Article 1and
More informationDISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHING STAFF AT LOCALLY MANAGED SCHOOLS
LONDON BOROUGH OF BARKING AND DAGENHAM DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ARTS AND LIBRARIES DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHING STAFF AT LOCALLY MANAGED SCHOOLS Department of Education, Arts and Libraries Town
More informationGeneral Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017
General Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017 (Reprinted under the Interpretation Ordinance 1985.) Clause Table of Provisions 1....................... Name 2.......................
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JULIANA WEBSTER CLAIMANT AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2011-03158 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JULIANA WEBSTER CLAIMANT AND REPUBLIC BANK LIMITED PC KAREN RAMSEY #13191 PC KERN PHILLIPS #16295 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
More informationDISCIPLINARY RULES. Board means the Board of Directors for the time being of the Society;
DISCIPLINARY RULES 1. Definitions In these Rules: Appeal Committee means the Committee of the Council of the Society from time to time constituted as such under Rule 7.1 to hear an appeal against a decision
More informationTHE REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITIES ACT, 1994 REGULATIONS THE REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITIES (CONDUCT) REGULATIONS, 2008
Legal Notice No. REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO THE REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITIES ACT, 1994 REGULATIONS Made by the Minister under section 35 of the Regional Health Authorities Act THE REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITIES
More informationDISCIPLINARY CODE. 4. A Disciplinary Committee shall be constituted as follows:
DISCIPLINARY CODE 1. This Disciplinary Code supports the Code of Conduct for Members of the Board of Trustees and the ECCO code of ethics and professional guidelines which apply to all members of the Institute.
More informationCanterbury & District Soccer Football Association Incorporated. Judiciary Disciplinary & Appeals Regulations 2017 (Version 1 19 th December 2016)
Canterbury & District Soccer Football Association Incorporated. Judiciary Disciplinary & Appeals Regulations 2017 (Version 1 19 th December 2016) 1 Contents 1. INTRODUCTION... 5 2. CORRESPONDENCE, PRESCRIBED
More informationData Protection Bill [HL]
Data Protection Bill [HL] THIRD MARSHALLED LIST OF AMENDMENTS TO BE MOVED ON REPORT The amendments have been marshalled in accordance with the Order of 4th December 2017, as follows Clauses 1 to 9 Clauses
More informationWhistleblower Protection Act 10 of 2017 (GG 6450) ACT
(GG 6450) This Act has been passed by Parliament, but it has not yet been brought into force. It will come into force on a date set by the Minister in the Government Gazette. ACT To provide for the establishment
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009
COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 Arrangement of Rules COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Arrangement of Rules Rule PART I - PRELIMINARY 7 1 Citation and commencement... 7 2 Interpretation....
More information