Local Barrister-at-Law wins case against Federal Government

By Terresa McCall
Reporter-SKNVibes.com

Barrister-at-Law Angela Inniss

Barrister-at-Law Angela Inniss won her fight with the Federal Government for terminating her services as Registrar of the High Court before expiration of her contract.

Two days ago, Wednesday, July 30, the Privy Council delivered its judgment in the case of Angela Innis versus Attorney General of St. Christopher and Nevis and stated that their Lordships “will humbly advise Her Majesty that the appeal should be allowed, that the order of the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court of 12 January 2002 should be set aside and that the orders and declarations by Moore J on 21 February 2000 should be restored…”

The judgment also includes the award of $100 000 and the declaration that Inniss’ dismissal was null and void.

The judgment also states, “There is much more to this case than the element of distress and inconvenience that the award was directed to in this case. The summary nature of the dismissal, for which no reason was given, must have been acutely distressing in itself. There was a risk that this would have an adverse effect on the appellant’s future its own interests. Adequate vindication of the appellant’s constitutional right is especially important in such circumstances.”

Speaking with SKNVibes, Inniss said although she feels vindicated there is a bigger lesson to be had.  “I feel totally vindicated by the judgment, and the way that I look at it is that judgments like these, especially in St. Kitts and the wider Caribbean region, emphasise that the individual or citizen has rights which would be recognised by the court and the constitution is to be seen in a very wide light,” she said.

Quoting James Robinson, the lawyer emphasised, “The constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” ~~Adz:Right~~

The former High Court Registrar declared that during the 10-year process, she learnt from her good and bad experiences and used them as sources of motivation.

“I felt that it was important to make the sacrifice to take this to the Privy Council so that I would make a difference in the working life of persons who would in the future serve in the positions of registrars and magistrates, because my experience opened up my eyes to what exactly can happen when governments expect you to behave according to your political allegiances. 

“I have, throughout the 10 years, experienced a lot of discouragement. I have at times felt targeted in terms of certain things which were happening to me but, with each infraction, I found that I got stronger and I felt that there was more and more of a need to make the decision to push forward and see things to the end. The things that happen to you in life happen to make you a better person. Along the way, I have met the bad and good people who were able to encourage me to continue to go forward, and people who were willing to stand beside me in terms of support.”

For their support in her legal battle with the Government, Inniss expressed gratitude to Senior Counsel Carl Hudson Phillip QC, Terence Byron C.M.G., her parents and her husband.

“I want to also thank those Judges of the High Court with which I worked, from whom I gained a wealth of experiences and from whom I was able to see that there is a desire as judicial officers to take a stand for the independence of the judicatory. Because of meeting these people, I was able to take the stand which I took,” Inniss expressed.

Inniss, legal battle began in 1998 when she took the matter before the High Court, and in February 2000, presiding judge, Justice Stanley Moore, who was then based in the BVI, ruled that her constitutional rights were breached and that her dismissal was null and void. She was awarded $100 000 in damages.

During that case, Inniss argued that the Constitution of St. Kitts and Nevis provided that removal of a Registrar of the High Court had to be effected in a particular manner, which involved a hearing before and recommendation by the judicial and legal services Commission based in St. Kitts. 

The Government however argued that she had signed in her contract appointing her, a clause permitting the Government to terminate her services at any time without having to give any reason. 

The Government appealed the decision and the case was taken before the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, and on January 14, 2002, Justice Moore’s decision was overturned and the Court of Appeal ruled that there was no breach of Inniss’ constitutional rights.  The Court of Appeal further ruled that it was a simple matter of contract and Inniss was awarded the sum of $19,351.60.

Inniss, not being pleased with the outcome of the case, took it to the highest level and it was heard at by the Privy Council. 

Her case was argued by Senior Counsel Carl Hudson Phillip QC, of Trinidad and Tobago, and Junior Counsel Terence V Byron and heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which comprised of Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance of Frognal and Lord Nueberger of Abbotsbury.