Abrams v the Members of the Governing Body of the Anglican Schools in B. G. and Others

JurisdictionGuyana
JudgeLuckhoo, C.J.,Slesser, L. J.
Judgment Date23 April 1960
Neutral CitationGY 1960 HC 13
CourtHigh Court (Guyana)
Date23 April 1960

High Court

Luckhoo, C.J. (Ag.)

Abrams
and
The Members of the Governing Body of the Anglican Schools in B. G. and others

L. F. S. Burnham and Dr. F. W. H. Ramsahoye for the plaintiff.

J. H. S. Elliott for the first-and third-named defendants.

S. S. Ramphal, Solicitor-General, for the second-named defendant.

Administrative law - Natural justice — Dismissal of teacher for criminal conviction — No departmental inquiry — Whether dismissal a nullity — Education Ordinance, Cap. 91, ss. 47 — 51, and Education Code, Cap. 91, reg. 59.

1

Luckhoo, C.J. (Ag.) This is a claim by the plaintiff against the defendants jointly and severally for—

  • (a) a declaration that the dismissal of the plaintiff by the third named defendant Jones from his employment as a second-class certificated assistant teacher at the Cane Grove Anglican School was unlawful, null and void;

  • (b) an injunction restraining the defendants from preventing the plaintiff from exercising his duties as such second-class certificated assistant teacher at the Cane Grove Anglican School.;

  • (c) $10,000 as damages for wrongful dismissal;

  • (d) a declaration that the action of the first-named defendants, the members of the Governing Body of Anglican Schools in British Guiana, and/or the second-named defendant, the Director of Education, in adopting and/or ratifying and/or acquiescing in the third named defendant's dismissal of the plaintiff was unlawful, ultra vires, null and void;

  • (e) an injunction restraining the defendants and every of them from dismissing or interdicting the plaintiff from his post as a second-class certificated teacher at Cane Grove Anglican School or any other suitable primary school within the Colony.

2

A statement of agreed facts was filed in the action on March 5, 1957, at the hearing before me it was agreed by counsel for all parties that statement would take the place of and be in substitution for evidence on oath and the hearing of the action proceeded on that basis.

3

Counsel for the plaintiff at the hearing abandoned all claim to an award of special damages.

4

The statement of agreed facts filed is as follows:

AGREED FACTS

  • 1. The first-named defendants are and were at all material times the governing body, and in control, of the Anglican Schools, including the Cane Grove Anglican School, in the Colony of British Guiana.

  • 2. The third-named defendant was nominated manager of the said Cane Grove Anglican School by the first-named defendants and was at all material times so acting, the first-named defendants having delegated to him all their powers in regard to the said school except the appointment or termination of appointment of head teachers and first-assistant teachers of which delegation the first-named defendants informed the second-named defendant in writing.

  • 3. The plaintiff was by letter of appointment dated March 22, 1954, and signed by the third-named defendant appointed as from May 1, 1954, a Class II assistant teacher at Cane Grove Anglican School, an aided school in the county of Demerara. The said appointment was approved by the second-named defendant, and was not an appointment of a head or first assistant teacher.

  • 4. The said letter of appointment was in the following terms:

    “ASSISTANTS

    Address: St. Mark's

    Vicarage Circular letter

    Enmore

    No.

    22 nd March, 1954.

    Cane Grove Anglican School

    Sir,

    You are hereby appointed Class II Assistant of the above-named school with effect from 1st May, 1954, at a salary of $95.00 a month.

    • 2. You will be liable to be transferred from time to time, subject to the approval of the Director of Education, for duty as Assistant Teacher in any School under the control of the Governing Body of the Anglican Schools provided that no loss of salary is thereby incurred.

    • 3. Your employment is subject to the provisions of the Education Code, as amended from time to time, and may be terminated by one month's notice in writing on either side.

    • 4. Your duties will be to undertake such teaching and supervisory duties as may reasonably be assigned to you by the Head Teacher, and to give religious instruction to the pupils as follows:- as directed by the Head Teacher.

    • 5. A copy of a letter from the Director approving of your appointment is attached.

    Yours faithfully,

    Joseph H. Jones

    (Manager)

    Cane Grove Anglican School.

    Mr. Bertrand Abrams

    Address: Golden Grove

    E.C. Demerara

    Read and Noted

    Bertrand Abrams

    Class II Asst. Teacher

    St. Andrew's Anglican School

    Date: 24.3.54.”

  • 5. Pursuant to the said letter the plaintiff took up his said appointment and acted and was paid as such teacher until January 11, 1955.

  • 6. On July 21, 1954, the plaintiff was convicted by the magistrate of the East Demerara Judicial District for being on June 10, 1954, in possession of prohibited publications contrary to s. 4 of the Undesirable Publications (Prohibition of Importation) Ordinance, and fined $25 or one month's imprisonment in default. The complaint was filed on June 30, 1954, and made returnable for July 7, 1954.

  • 7. On July 31, 1954, the plaintiff filed notice of appeal against the said conviction, and on August 3, 1954, lodged with the clerk of the court for the East Demerara Judicial District the sum of $25 to abide the costs of the said appeal, but took no further step in connection therewith, save that he paid the said fine of $25.

  • 8. On January 8, 1955, the second-named defendant wrote to the third-named defendant as follows:

    “No. 364/46 Education Department,

    P. O. Box 41

    British Guiana

    8 th of January, 1955.

    Dear Sir,

    Mr. Bertrand Abrams-Appeal

    I desire to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 6th January 1955, on the above named subject along with the enclosure.

    As the Superintendent of Police has now informed you that Mr. Abrams has abandoned the appeal and paid the fine, he may now be dismissed in accordance with the ruling of the Law Officers for a breach of the emergency regulations.

    Yours faithfully,

    (Sgd.) R. C. G. Potter.

    Director of Education (Ag.)

    Rev. J. H. Jones,

    St. Mark's Vicarage,

    Enmore, E.C. Demerara.”

  • 9. On January 10, 1955, the third-named defendant acting in accordance with the second-named defendant's instructions, wrote to the plaintiff as follows:

    “St. Mark's Vicarage,

    Enmore,

    E.C. Demerara,

    10th January, 1955.

    Mr. Bertrand Abrams,

    Cane Grove Anglican School East Coast, Demerara

    Dear Sir,

    As the appeal against your conviction has been abandoned and the fine paid, I have to inform you that, in accordance with the ruling of the Law Officers for the breach of the emergency regulations, you are dismissed from your post as a C1. II Assistant Teacher in Cane Grove Anglican School as from 11th January, 1955.

    Yours faithfully,

    (Sgd.) Joseph H. Jones

    Manager.”

  • 10. Since January, 1955, the plaintiff has not carried out any duties as such Class II assistant teacher at the said Cane Grove Anglican School and has not received any salary.

  • 11. On April 27, 1955, the plaintiff wrote to the second-named defendant as follows:

    “Nabaclis,

    E.C. Demerara.

    27th April, 1955.

    The Director of Education,

    Education Dept.

    Dear Sir,

    I hereby request that the full reasons be supplied to me, which caused my dismissal from the post of Cert. Asst. Class II which I held on the staff of Cane Grove Anglican School until the date of my dismissal, the 11th January, 1955.

    I was dismissed by a note received on the same day from the Manager Rev. J. H. Jones, and the clearest indication of the reasons for dismissal given by the note was that it accorded ‘with the advice of the law officers.’

    This request is made in the interests of establishing clearer basis of my present position in keeping with the terms of Regulation 5 (1) (a) of the Education Code.

    Thanking you,

    I am,

    Yours respectfully,

    (Sgd.) Bertrand Abrams.”

5

This action had come on for hearing on September 11 and 22, 1958, before STOBY, J., who on the latter date reserved decision in the matter. Unfortunately it was not possible for STOBY, J., to prepare and deliver judgment before proceeding in December, 1958, to take up his appointment as Chief Justice of Barbados. Thereafter, for various reasons the re-hearing of the matter could not proceed until January 12, 1960.

6

It was submitted by the Solicitor-General on behalf of the second-named defendant, the Director of Education, that the Director is not as such a legal persona and accordingly cannot be made a defendant in any proceeding before the court.

7

Section 3 of the Education Ordinance, Cap. 91, provides that the Governor, with the approval of the Secretary of State, may appoint a Director of Education for the Colony who shall receive the salary or emoluments from time to time provided for that purpose by the Legislative Council, and who shall hold office during pleasure. The Director is a Crown servant and is not a corporate body.

8

The Solicitor-General cited the case of Raleigh v. Goschen [1898] 1 Ch. 73, as authority for the proposition that actions will not lie against Crown servants in their official capacity. In that case the plaintiffs brought a claim against the defendants in their official capacity as Lords of the Admiralty with a view to establishing as against them that they were not entitled to enter upon, or acquire by way of compulsory purchase certain land, the property or the plaintiffs, and claiming damages for trespass and an injunction to restrain further trespass, It was held by ROMER, J., that though the plaintiffs could sue any of the defendants individually for trespass committed by them, they could not sue them in their official capacity. Leave to amend by suing the defendants in their individual capacity was not- granted the plaintiffs on the ground that to do so would be to change one action into another of a substantially different character.

9

In the present case it is to be observed that the action has been brought against the Director of Education as such without...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT