Visit UKSCAll cases
915 Cases
JCPC/2024/0088
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2024/0087
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.
Linked casesLast updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2024/0015
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment scheduledCase summary:What is the meaning of the words “independent of the Government, Business and Labour” in the context of the appointment of the chairman of the National Insurance Board of Trinidad and Tobago under section 3(2)(d) of the National Insurance Act 1971?
Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2022/0011
•
CONSTITUTION
Judgment givenCase summary:What is the correct interpretation of Section 121(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Regulation 168 of the Public Service Commission Regulations (“Reg. 168”) in the context of prison officer promotions?
Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0024
•
CONSTITUTION
Appeal issuedCase summary:Were the appellants entitled to declaratory relief in respect of the breaches of their constitutional rights as identified by the Judge? What is the correct approach that the courts should adopt to the assessment and award of vindicatory (as opposed to compensatory) damages? Have the courts in Trinidad and Tobago adopted an erroneous approach to the assessment of damages awarded for the breach of constitutional rights?
Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0118
•
EMPLOYMENT
Appeal issuedCase summary:Does the Industrial Court have jurisdiction to decide that a failure to provide for retirement benefits constitutes a breach of good industrial relations practices for which an award was justifiable under the Industrial Relations Act 1972, section 10(3)?
Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2026/0006
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 28 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0071
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Appeal issuedCase summary:(1) Did the trial judge and Supreme Court err by failing to consider the Defendant’s argument that the proceedings were an abuse of process? (2) Were the findings of fact made by the trial judge and upheld by the Supreme Court plainly wrong? (3) Were the proceedings procedurally flawed because the document appointing the Respondents’ proxy had not been filed in the Registry of the Supreme Court?
Last updated: 27 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0022
•
CRIME
Hearing listedCase summary:(1) Should fresh psychiatric evidence regarding the appellant, obtained after his conviction for murder, be admitted and considered by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council? (2) Does the fresh psychiatric evidence show that the appellant was not guilty of murder but of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility or, alternatively, that the appellant was not fit to plead or stand trial? (3) Did the trial judge materially misdirect the jury as to the elements of the defence of provocation?
Last updated: 27 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0013
•
INSOLVENCY
Case summary:(1) Was the Court of Civil Appeal wrong in holding that the Appellants should have challenged the validity of the appointment of the Second Respondent as administrator, and applied to bring such appointment to an end, in first instance proceedings under ss. 214, 219 and 281 of the Insolvency Act 2009 (“IA 2009”) (being remedies that remain available to them)? (2) Should the Board grant a stay of the orders appointing the administrator pending the determination of the appeal on the merits?
Last updated: 26 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0116
•
ARBITRATION
Appeal issuedCase summary:Whether the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, insofar as it seeks to award third-party litigation costs incurred pursuant to a litigation funding agreement, is contrary to the public policy of Mauritius within the meaning of Article V(2)(b) of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958) as enacted.
Last updated: 26 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0050
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Appeal issuedCase summary:The case raises the following issues: (1) Did the Court of Appeal err in reversing the finding that the Respondent had not proved documentary title in respect of the contested property? May the courts rely on section 3 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act to require the Respondent to deduce title beyond her 1963 Conveyance? (2) Did the Court of Appeal wrongly interfere with the finding that the Appellant had proved intention to possess? Does section 38 of the Limitation Act 1995 apply in the present circumstances? (3) If the Respondent has documentary title and the Appellant has possessory title in respect of the property, does the former, even if defective, constitute better title than the latter in a claim in trespass?
Last updated: 23 January 2026
JCPC/2021/0109
•
PROCEDURE
Case closedCase summary:Under the Strategic Services Agency Act, Chapter 15:06 of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago (the "SSA Act"), is the Strategic Services Agency (the "SSA") a legal person capable of being sued in tort?
Last updated: 23 January 2026
JCPC/2025/0085
•
CONSTITUTION
Appeal issuedCase summary:Was the Court of Appeal correct to set aside the trial judge’s findings that the Appellant’s right to property had been deprived under section 4(a) of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago? If so, was the Court of Appeal entitled to reduce the Appellant’s costs of the appeal by 50%?
Last updated: 22 January 2026
JCPC/2024/0062
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether compliance with conditions precedent to payment in a FIDIC contract is essential in order to enable a contractor to recover payment for variations alleged to have been made.
Last updated: 22 January 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.