Justice Margaret Reifer yesterday ruled that information sought by attorney-at-law Alair Shepherd Q.C on a previous occasion, was not “relevant or central” to the matter before the court, nor was it necessary for “disposing fairly” of the case.
The judge therefore determined that the “trial shall proceed” without that document being produced before the No. 2 Supreme Court.
Shepherd had made an application on behalf of his client Errol Ellis, based largely on evidence that the Police Services Commission (PSC) had denied Ellis’ promotion based on information which they had.
Sir Trevor Carmichael, the former PSC Chairman, previously appeared in the civil case involving 14 Royal Barbados Police Force officers who are challenging a decision where they were up for promotion but had their names struck from the list.
Carmichael had said that the Commission was unable to recommend Ellis for promotion based on documents which came before it. He added that “all factors” relating to him and the others up for promotion, had been considered.
However, when questioned by Shepherd, Carmichael had refused to disclose what the document relating to Ellis contained. He also was not in agreement that he should furnish the court with the information which became known to the Commission in relation to Ellis, nor the discussions held since it was ‘privileged’ and he could not divulge it.
Shepherd then argued that the document should be allowed into evidence since his client, Ellis, had the right to see the documentation which the PSC considered in denying his promotion.