This morning, the Full Court of the High Court heard and dismissed an appeal in the case of Tamieka Clarke vs. the Attorney General, Anil Nandlall.
Clarke, the appellant, appealed a decision of the Chief Justice made on November 17, 2023 ordering the Attorney General to pay Clarke damages in the sum of $700,000 and costs in the sum of $250,000.
Clarke, an attorney-at-law, was detained by ranks attached to the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) ranks on October 28, 2022 for under an hour at its headquarters. She had filed a Fixed Date Application suing the Attorney General for breach of her fundamental right to liberty pursuant to Article 139 of the Constitution, and sought declaratory orders and damages relating to her detention.
At the time of the incident, the Attorney General issued a public apology, and made several offers to settle the matter out of court in an effort to avoid protracted litigation. These were rejected by Clarke. The matter came up for hearing on the June 12, 2023 before Chief Justice, Madam Justice Roxane George SC, and the AG conceded liability on the part of the State leaving only the question of compensation to be determined.
On November 17, 2023 following submissions by both parties, the
Court determined the issue and ordered that an apology be made by the SOCU rank to Clarke, and awarded to Clarke $700,000 and costs of $250,000.
In the Full Court this morning, the Attorney General objected to the jurisdiction of the Full Court to hear the appeal filed, arguing that the appeal should have been filed to the Court of Appeal as it related to a final decision of the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction on matters of enforcement of fundamental rights and freedoms.
After hearing submissions from both sides, the Full Court upheld the Attorney General’s jurisdictional objection, ruling that the appeal should have been directed to the Court of Appeal. The Full Court also awarded the Attorney General costs in the sum of $200,000. The Attorney
General appeared in person, leading Shoshanna V. Lall, Laurel Dundas, Aruna Budhram, and Ismat Bacchus for the Respondent.
The Applicant was represented by lawyers Nigel Hughes and Shawn Shewram.
