Privy Council clarifies when a failure to pay salary amounts to a deprivation of property in Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Favianna Gajadhar [2026] UKPC 35
The Privy Council has given guidance on when a failure to pay a public officer’s salary amounts to a deprivation of property under the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. The judgment contains general principles that will be relevant to other claims concerning the deprivation of property.
The Privy Council noted that, when a decision to terminate a public officer’s employment is found by the courts to have been unlawful, the normal (though not inevitable) result is that the public officer is held to have remained in office, entitled to the remuneration attaching to such office, so long as she remained ready, willing and able to render the service required.
Where a public officer’s salary was stopped due to an unlawful termination, the fact that the State has been held to have acted unlawfully does not by itself necessarily show that there has been an arbitrary exercise of power which amounts to a deprivation of property. It is necessary to consider the particular circumstances and whether there was, for example, a bona fide dispute in which it cannot be said that either party was acting unreasonably until the legal position had ultimately been clarified by the court.
The Privy Council found that the appellant’s salary in the instant case had been withheld without due process following her unlawful termination, amounting to an arbitrary and oppressive exercise of state power and a deprivation of her property.
Katie Lines acted for the successful appellant, instructed by Freedom Law Chambers and led by Anand Ramlogan SC of Freedom Law Chambers and Jodie Blackstock of Garden Court Chambers.
The judgment can be found here.
