Derek Achong
The Court of Appeal has raised the possibility that citizens could eventually pursue lawsuits against other individuals for breaches of privacy, even as it ruled that such claims are not currently recognised under Trinidad and Tobago law.
Appellate Judges Mark Mohammed, Maria Wilson and James Aboud addressed the issue while hearing an appeal by two teenagers who were discovered locked in a toilet at a shopping mall in Barrackpore before school and confronted by the property owner, Krishen Basdeo.
The panel ruled that a High Court judge had been wrong to dismiss aspects of the teenagers’ claims involving false imprisonment and battery. However, the judges found that the teenagers could not pursue a tort claim for breach of privacy.
Writing the judgment, Justice Wilson explained that citizens can currently exercise their constitutional right to privacy only against the State or its agents, not against other private individuals.
She said the teens’ attorney, Lee Merry, presented compelling arguments urging the courts to recognise privacy claims between citizens, particularly in light of technological advances and the rapid spread of information online.
“We cannot simply ignore this new ecosystem,” Wilson said.
“Instead, it ought to compel Parliament and/or our courts, most likely the latter, to consider seriously the recognition of the law of right to privacy between individuals in order to ensure that individuals have an available remedy for infringement of their rights by other individuals,” she added.
Despite that observation, Wilson said the case was not suitable for such a development because the teenagers did not have permission from the landlord or a tenant to use the toilet.
“The situation would have been very different if they had the permission of the seamstress to be in the toilet,” she said.
“It is no different from an intruder entering one’s backyard and claiming that they have a right to privacy if you take their photo.”
The case arose from an October 2018 incident when Basdeo allegedly found the teens locked in the toilet and a man who accompanied him recorded them while they were questioned. The recording later circulated on social media.
The mothers of the 17-year-old male and 15-year-old female students filed the lawsuit after the video spread online.
In 2020, High Court judge Frank Seepersad rejected their explanation that the boy had been helping the girl, who allegedly felt ill due to her menstrual cycle.
“I found the evidence of both Claimants to lack credibility and I find that it was more plausible to conclude on a balance of probabilities that these two young people were engaged in a romantic tryst in the bathroom,” Seepersad said.
“Clearly these young people were young and restless and were pursuing their romantic endeavours in a public environment in a private bathroom.”
However, the Court of Appeal ruled there was no evidence that the teenagers were engaged in sexual activity.
While the judges accepted that the pair were trespassing, Wilson ruled that Basdeo did not have the authority under the Trespass Act to detain them. She also found that he committed battery against the male student by pushing him as he tried to leave.
The court ordered Basdeo to pay $30,000 in compensation to the male student and $25,000 to the female student.
Justice Aboud delivered a dissenting opinion, suggesting that the compensation should have been higher because the confrontation involved minors.
“The minors were vulnerable, in a position of weakness, and subservient to his aggressive behavior and vulgarities,” Aboud said.
The teenagers were also represented by attorney Vanita Ramroop, while Che Dindial appeared for Basdeo.
