Derek Achong
Senior Reporter
derek.achong@guardian.co.tt
A former police officer, who was dismissed for coercing a couple to have sex in his presence in public, has failed in his final appeal over being denied a pension and gratuity.
In a decision earlier this week, three Law Lords of the United Kingdom-based Privy Council denied Chad Antoine permission to pursue a final appeal over a decision by the local courts to reject his legal challenge.
"Special leave is refused because the appeal is devoid of merit," a notice on the Privy Council's website stated.
According to the evidence in the case, Antoine joined the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) in 1980.
In early 2001, he was charged with the disciplinary offence of discreditable conduct.
The charges related to an incident a year before in which a couple claimed that they were sitting in a car parked around the Queen's Park Savannah around 11.30 pm when Antoine approached them.
They claimed that he demanded that they have sexual intercourse in his presence, and they complied.
They then reported Antoine, leading to the disciplinary proceedings.
He was found guilty of the offence and dismissed after appearing before a three-member disciplinary tribunal.
An appeal against the outcome was rejected by the Public Service Appeal Board in 2004.
He then filed the lawsuit alleging that his constitutional right to equality of treatment from a public authority was breached as he was denied a pension and gratuity after his dismissal.
In June 2020, Antoine's case was dismissed by High Court Judge Robin Mohammed.
Justice Mohammed ruled that he was not entitled to retirement benefits based on Pensions and Gratuities Rules under the Police Service Act.
He noted that the rules permitted the withholding of such benefits if an officer's service is broken by suspension or dismissal.
Justice Mohammed also noted that Antoine failed to present evidence to buttress his claim that a colleague received retirement benefits after he was found guilty of three disciplinary offences.
Stating that Antoine still had to prove his claim, although the Office of the Attorney General failed to directly address the allegation, Justice Mohammed said: "It would be reckless of this Court if it accepts the testimony of the Claimant without more on such a fundamental issue."
In December 2024, Appellate Judges Mira Dean-Armorer, Vasheist Kokaram and Malcolm Holdip dismissed Antoine's appeal.
The panel ruled that Justice Mohammed's reasoning could not be faulted and Antoine's complaints over it were devoid of merit.
