Statutory Authorities Commission facing contempt of court order

This was the order of Justice Eleanor Donaldson- Honeywell who granted Joan Chee permission to initiate contempt proceedings against the SASC which has failed to comply with the judge’s orders issued on April 25.

In her application for relief, Chee’s attorneys petitioned Justice Donaldson- Honeywell to invoke Part 51.1 and 53.5 of the Civil Proceedings Rules to force the SASC to act on her ruling.

In granting the order, the SASC is to reconsider Chee’s promotion within two weeks.

Should the commission fail to do so, Chee has the court’s permission to apply for a committal order.

Justice Donaldson- Honeywell in April ruled that Chee was unfairly treated when she was bypassed for promotion.

Chee in 2016 was bypassed for promotion to the position of Acting Personnel and Industrial Relations Officer III (PIRO).

Chee filed a judicial review claim against the SASC, contending that the commission acted irrationally and unreasonably when it appointed someone else to act in the position PIRO III. She complained that the person who got the job never acted in the position before or held lower PIRO positions and that she (Chee) had the experience, qualifications and a recommendation of the chief executive officer of the corporation for the promotion.

She also submitted staff reports which rated her performance as excellent and outstanding.

In a 26-page judgment, Justice Donaldson- Honeywell ruled that the Commission acted irrationally and in breach of Chee’s legitimate expectation that she would be promoted to the acting position.

Chee began working at the Port of Spain City Corporation as a temporary Clerk I in 1978.

In her judgement, Justice Donaldson-Honeywell noted that the CEO of the PoSCC had strongly recommended Chee for the acting appointment, however, the SASC ignored that recommendation and bypassed Chee in favour of the other person.

The judge also found that commission failed to properly consider the relevant factor of seniority, considered irrelevant factors and placed insufficient weight on relevant considerations such as the CEO’s recommendations.

She also found that there was insufficient evidence that the SASC properly considered her long record of unblemished service, her excellent and outstanding performance during previous acting appointments in the position of PIRO III, the fact that she was already serving in the PIRO stream and appraised as eminently qualified for promotion to the office of PIRO III, and the several strong and compelling recommendations of the CEO which made in her favour were taken into account.