Court refuses to strike out municipal cop’s claim against Arima Borough Corporation

A High Court judge has dismissed an application by the Arima Borough Corporation to strike out a claim brought by a municipal police officer whose salary was stopped without explanation in 2019.

Justice Karen Reid ruled against the corporation’s request, allowing Arnold Pinto’s claim to proceed to trial.

In his lawsuit, Pinto, injured in a road traffic accident while on duty, alleged the corporation unlawfully ceased his salary in August 2019 after barring him from reporting for duty in December 2018.

Reid found that Pinto’s claim should be heard as an ordinary breach of contract matter and not dismissed on procedural grounds.

Pinto, a police constable with the Arima Municipal Police, filed his initial constitutional motion against the Attorney General in January 2023. He sought redress for the alleged violation of his right to protection of the law. However, in a ruling on January 18, 2024, Reid ruled the claim should proceed as an ordinary civil action rather than a constitutional motion. It also determined that the corporation was the proper defendant, not the Attorney General.

According to Pinto’s claim, he suffered acts of victimisation after his return to work in 2018 when a medical board declared him fit for service.

On December 24, 2018, a superior officer allegedly informed him that he was not allowed to report for duty until further notice. His salary was later discontinued in August 2019 without formal disciplinary action or termination by the Statutory Authorities Service Commission (SASC), the body responsible for municipal police appointments.

After being substituted as the defendant, the corporation sought to strike out the claim, arguing that the matter was statute-barred and Pinto was not the corporation’s employee but an officer under the authority of the SASC.

The corporation also argued that any claim concerning his terms of employment should have been brought through judicial review or constitutional motion rather than an ordinary civil claim.

Reid rejected the corporation’s arguments, stating that the application was an abuse of process. She noted that the court had already ruled on the proper procedure for the claim in its January 2024 decision and the corporation’s application sought to re-litigate settled issues.

Reid also noted that the corporation, when served, did not file a defence but its strike-out application.

The judge further found the corporation’s argument that Pinto was not its employee was “peculiar and unsupported by legal authority.”

Reid held that while the SASC handles municipal police appointments and discipline, municipal corporations are still considered the employer for salary and administrative purposes.

Additionally, the court ruled that Pinto’s claim was filed within the statutory limitation period, as the alleged breach of contract — his salary stoppage — occurred in August 2019.

In dismissing the corporation’s application, the judge ordered it to pay Pinto’s legal costs, which will be assessed by the Registrar if not agreed.

The case will now proceed to trial. Kiel Taklalsingh, Stefan Ramkissoon and Kristy Mohan represent Pinto while Farai Hove Masaisai, Christopher George and Bernelle La Foucade represented the corporation.

The post Court refuses to strike out municipal cop’s claim against Arima Borough Corporation appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.