Derek Achong

A High Court Judge has or­dered $400,000 in com­pen­sa­tion for a po­lice of­fi­cer, whose pro­mo­tion­al prospects were ham­pered by the fail­ure of the T&T Po­lice Ser­vice (TTPS) to com­pile an­nu­al per­for­mance ap­praisals for him. 

De­liv­er­ing a judge­ment in PC Bertrand Ram­sumair’s case on Thurs­day, High Court Judge Kevin Ram­cha­ran ruled that he (Ram­sumair) had a le­git­i­mate ex­pec­ta­tion that there would have been per­for­mance ap­praisals for him and that the fail­ure to com­pile the same breached his con­sti­tu­tion­al right to pro­tec­tion of the law. 

Ac­cord­ing to Ram­sumair’s court fil­ings, ob­tained by Guardian Me­dia, he joined the T&T Po­lice Ser­vice (TTPS) in 1995 and suc­cess­ful­ly wrote the pro­mo­tion­al ex­am­i­na­tion for the rank of cor­po­ral in 2002. 

In Sep­tem­ber 2003, Ram­sumair and a col­league were charged with as­sault­ing and rob­bing a man in Princes Town. 

Ram­sumair was sus­pend­ed and placed on a three-quar­ter salary. Ram­sumair was even­tu­al­ly ac­quit­ted of the charges in 2016. He was re­in­stat­ed in March 2018 but was in­struct­ed to pro­ceed on com­pul­so­ry va­ca­tion leave un­til 2020. 

While on sus­pen­sion, Ram­sumair was in­formed that he was not rec­om­mend­ed for pro­mo­tion­al in­ter­views in 2006 and 2009 as he had no scores for per­for­mance ap­praisals. 

Ram­sumair ini­tial­ly be­lieved that the is­sue stemmed from him be­ing on sus­pen­sion but learned of his miss­ing ap­praisals for the pe­ri­od 1995 and 2002 when he sought to get a retroac­tive pro­mo­tion af­ter he was ac­quit­ted of the charge. 

In his de­ci­sion, Jus­tice Ram­cha­ran ruled that it was prob­a­ble that Ram­sumair would have been se­lect­ed for an in­ter­view by the Pro­mo­tion Ad­vi­so­ry Board had the ap­praisals been done as re­quired. 

He al­so not­ed that had Ram­sumair had got­ten the high­est pos­si­ble score in his per­for­mance ap­praisals, he still would not have been pro­mot­ed in 2006 ad his score would have still been low­er than the col­league, who re­ceived the low­est mark and was pro­mot­ed.

How­ev­er, he ruled that the Of­fice of the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er could not cre­ate a po­si­tion for Ram­sumair if none ex­ist­ed and sug­gest­ed that had the ap­praisals been done, a po­si­tion could have been held on es­crow in 2009 pend­ing the de­ter­mi­na­tion of the crim­i­nal charges. 

“In the cir­cum­stances, the Court can­not or­der that the Claimant be retroac­tive­ly pro­mot­ed to Cor­po­ral or Sergeant but notes that the fail­ure of the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er in hav­ing the per­for­mance ap­praisals pre­pared has caused him loss,” Jus­tice Ram­cha­ran said 

Jus­tice Ram­cha­ran or­dered $300,000 in com­pen­sato­ry dam­ages and $100,000 in vin­di­ca­to­ry dam­ages for Ram­sumair. 

He al­so or­dered the State to pay Ram­sumair’s le­gal costs for bring­ing the law­suit. 

Ram­sumair was rep­re­sent­ed by Anand Ram­lo­gan, SC, Jayan­ti Lutch­me­di­al, Alvin Pariags­ingh, and Alana Ram­baran.