Attorney General of the Cayman Islands (Respondent) v Shelliann Bush (Appellant) (Cayman Islands)

Hearing listed

Case summary
Appeal

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2024/0047

Jurisdiction

Cayman Islands

Parties

Appellant(s)

Shelliann Bush

Respondent(s)

Attorney General of the Cayman Islands

Issue

Did the refusal by the Second Respondent to investigate the Appellant’s complaint of unfair dismissal by her employer, a charitable organisation, under the Labour Act (2021 Revision) breach her right to a fair hearing under section 7(1) of the Bill of Rights?

Facts

The Appellant, an employee of Pines Retirement Home (“Pines”) for ten years, made a complaint to the Second Respondent that she had been unfairly dismissed. On 20 October 2021, Pines gave one month’s notice to all of its employees that their employment contract would not be renewed if they did not provide confirmation of having received a COVID-19 vaccination. The Appellant objected to being vaccinated, partly for religious reasons. Her employment was terminated on 22 November 2021 on the grounds of serious misconduct, in part because Pines alleges that she went in to work unwell and infected other people. She sought compensation for unfair dismissal from the Second Respondent under sections 49-55 of the Labour Act. The Second Respondent declined to investigate her complaint, on the grounds that the Labour Act does not apply to, amongst other entities, “charitable organisations”. It is common ground that Pines is a charitable organisation within the meaning of the Labour Act. The Appellant brought a claim against the Respondents, alleging that the refusal to hear her unfair dismissal complaint deprived her of her right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of her legal rights by an independent and impartial court, as provided for by section 7(1) of the Bill of Rights, Freedom and Responsibilities under Part 1 of the Cayman Islands Constitution Order 2009. The Grand Court found for the Appellant. The Court of Appeal allowed the Respondents’ appeal, on the basis that employees of charitable organisations have no substantive civil rights under the Labour Act in the first place. The Appellant now appeals as of right to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.