Two new judgments dropped last week from Trinidad & Tobago. In Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v CL Financial Ltd [2025] UKPC 41, the Board dismissed the appeal and sent the approval of court-appointed liquidators’ fees and expenses back to the High Court, although it disagreed with many parts of the Court of Appeal’s decision. Unusually for a T&T case, the judgment will have broader application as the Board did a deep dive into the law on liquidators’ and other insolvency officeholders’ remuneration, and how the parties and the court should approach that assessment.
The second judgment released on 16 September was University of the West Indies v Occupational Safety and Health Authority and Agency [2025] UKPC 42. In this statutory interpretation case, the Board agreed with the Trinidad & Tobago Court of Appeal that the Occupational Health and Safety Act applies a six-month time limit for the prosecution of any criminal offences under the Act, whether brought before a magistrate or the Industrial Court.
More judgments are coming down this week as the Privy Council prepares to return for Michaelmas term on 1 October. Krys v Farnum Place LLC [2025] UKPC 43 was released today. The case is based on an odd set of facts – the BVI court denied sanction to the liquidator to make an appeal in the United States. On appeal to the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal, the liquidator was permitted to take steps to protect his appeal rights in the US. By the time the ECCA finally decided the BVI appeal almost 8 years later, the liquidator had already won the appeal in the US, but the ECCA upheld the High Court’s decision refusing sanction for the liquidator to pursue that appeal. The Board agreed with the liquidator that the US decision allowing his appeal was a material change in circumstances that the ECCA should have taken into account. It then proceeded to reconsider the High Court’s decision itself, finding that the judge’s reasons for refusing the initial sanction were misguided and that sanction to bring the US appeal should have been granted. There is much more to be said about this case, and we will be discussing it further here at JCPC Watch.
Three other judgments are due this week, on 25 September:
- Cable & Wireless Jamaica Ltd v Abrahams, an appeal against a decision to refuse sanction of a scheme of arrangement that had been approved by the necessary statutory majorities. The respondent is a minority shareholder who challenged the scheme that would have cancelled his shares in the company. The appeal was heard on 20 May 2025 by Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Burrows, Lord Richards, and Lord Doherty.
- Trotman v Ramsaroop, a Trinidad & Tobago case on the intersection between habeas corpus and costs, and whether there is a general rule that brief fees for counsel are irrecoverable as costs in such applications. The appeal was heard on 2 July 2025 by Lord Hodge, Lord Sales, and Lord Burrows.
- Chief Fire Officer & Ors v Ramsaran, another Trinidad & Tobago case. The appellant sought judicial review of the Chief Fire Officer’s refusal to consider him for appointment as Deputy Chief Fire Officer based on alleged lack of necessary qualifications. The appeal was heard on 15 July 2025 by Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows, and Lord Stephens.