High Court Judge Errol Thomas has dismissed a lawsuit, DOMHCV2013/0017, filed against #258 Police Officer Mervin Charles and the attorney general of Dominica by John Ross Registe, station manager of Air Sunshine Airlines, and ordered cost of $1,500 to be paid by him (Registe).
Justice Thomas handed down his decision on October 3, 2014, in a matter involving assault, battery and false imprisonment.
Although the ruling agreed that the police officer had acted “unlawfully in arresting Registe,” it pointed out that the matter was taken to court nine months after the incident making it “statute barred.”
The claimant’s case is that on April 15, 2012 at about midnight, he was issued a ticket by the first defendant, Charles, for parking less than 15 feet from a corner and that after exchanges with Charles, he was handcuffed and thereafter arrested.
He was then taken to the Wesley Police Station, searched and placed in a cell for about nine hours. Later that same day he was charged with refusing to give his name and granted station bail in the amount of $1,000.
The sum of $75, being a fixed penalty, was paid on April 17, 2012 and on that same day he attended court on the charge for failing to give his name.
Registe pleaded not guilty and the matter was adjourned to October 3, 2012 where it was dismissed as no evidence was offered.
Registe is contending that the prosecution was brought “maliciously and without reasonable cause and was actuated by malice, spite and ill will and clearly designed to humiliate and tarnish his good name”.
Through his lawyer, Dawn Yearwood-Stewart, he sued the police officer and the attorney general for assault and battery and false imprisonment.
In his ruling, Justice Thomas explained that the ‘mischief of the legislation’ is that it has two mandatory and conjunctive conditions.
“The first is that if a Public Officer is sued, the commencement of the action is limited to six months from the date of the alleged action. After the six months the limitation comes into play and the claimant cannot commence the action. The other condition of the protection, is that the Public Officer must be acting within the scope of his duties to rely on the limitation,” he said.
He continued; “In this case, it is common ground that the event took place on 15, April 2012 and the action was commenced or filed on 20, January 2013, being nine (9) months after the event. This puts the action outside of the limitation period. And even if the first defendant’s action was done in vexation thereby making the unlawful arrest, this does not help the claimant as the action was commenced outside of the six month period. Stated otherwise, the unlawful action does not remove or alter the limitation period.”
“It is therefore the determination of the court that the claimant’s action is statute barred since it was not commenced within six months of the action sought to be litigated. Who is liable to pay cost? The claimant must pay the defendants cost in the amount of $1,500.00 unless otherwise agreed,” the judge said.
“It is hereby ordered that the claimant’s action having been filed 9 months after the alleged event of 15, April 2012 rather than the prescribed period of 6 months is statute barred by virtue of section 2 (1) of the Public Authorities Protection Act, notwithstanding the fact that the first defendant acted unlawfully in arresting the claimant,” the Judge stated.
Pearl Williams and Tara Leevy represented the police officer and the attorney general.
I honestly believe that the lawyer should assist the client with this payment. That was error on her part.
People take note. I love technicalities in those cases.
Has anybody considered that the judge might be wrong and that Registe might appeal the judge’s decision? So many matters are filed outside the 6 months period against police and public officers that there must be a reason for doing so. Time will tell
This just doesnt make sense rewarding a police officer for doing something wrong smh
Dats y people will always use the Haitian way of justice, its a better justice system… lots of those police will go cocofield court, watch and see
LOLOLOLOL
Boy you to ungrateful that is why you loose. You ask for mercy for the charge to be dropped by the officers and it was dropped and you want to sue.
Is anyone really surprised by this court decision. DA is corrupt to the core. The courts always side with the police.
Crappy justice system in dominica criminals get away with murder money laundering and drugs,officer illegally arrest citizen and get away free,communist nation all freedom gone people.
The lawyer who represented Mr. Reguiste should be responsible for paying the $1500. He should have advised his client of the time limit.
this lawyer was too busy trying to bring down the police she could not recognize the time limit had already elapsed. they need to do their research.
haha. boy them two man go school together wii. and so much man parking so stupid in wesely. that one man that come from outside the village he want to make example of.. see how them bwoy there dutty..
His lawyer cannot be serious
Well it can be argued that they awaited the outcome of the criminal proceedings filed against him before commencing their civil case against the agents of the state as the would have deemed his acquittal as the only thing adding teeth to his civil matter.
Sounds like His lawyer is at fault for not advising Him about the statute of limitations in this matter.
I wonder if He can now sue the lawyer for the $1500 costs?
RULES, RULES, RULES, and no justice