Viewers may remember Dr. Abigail McKay, she was a Dean at the University of Belize who's 3 year employment ended when the then President refused to grant her a 2 year extension. She believed that she was entitled to a 5-year extension and in 2014, she sued the University. Justice Courtney Abel granted her permission to bring her case for judicial review against UB.
She never got her chance to bring her full case, because shortly after that, the University, represented by Denys Barrow, applied to the Court of Appeal to challenge the decision of the Supreme Court. That case came up before the Court of Appeal where Barrow, and McKay's attorney, Audrey Matura-Shepherd, tried to convince the panel of judges why the case should or should not be struck out.
After about 2 hours of presentation, the Court of Appeal agreed with Barrow and ruled that McKay's lawsuit should end. It's a victory for UB, and possibly the end of McKay's legal fight. We spoke with the attorneys for both sides, and here's what they had to say:
Denys Barrow, Attorney for UB
"The claimant brought a claim in what you called judicial review against the University saying that they should have extended her contract by a further two years beyond the 3 years for which she signed. We took the point, the University took the point in the high court that that was a wring claim to bring, that she has a contract for 3 years. If she was dissatisfied with that she would not have made a 3 year contract. She insisted that she had a right. Although the contract doesn't say so to a two year extension. The Court of Appeal in effect upheld that. That there was not any decision made by the University to terminate or to do anything. She signed for a 3 years contract and that was the end of it. If she had a right or had any basis for claiming that they ought to have given her a performance review etc. - that was a claim in contract and not a claim for judicial review."
Audrey Matura Shephard, Attorney for Abigail McKay
"They are saying that the application would have been best grounded in contract. But, it brings into question now the fact as to the validity of the staff and faculty handbook of the University, which is what many of the people rely on. Because they are saying it has no force. It has never been brought in by statute. Although I tried to argue that there are cases that show that not everything is by statute, that there are legitimate expectations. Clearly, if you were in there you would see that the Judge especially Justice Blackman was absolutely not for it. He made a clear-cut distinction between the contract and judicial review. So at the end of the day they are not saying that she doesn't have a claim, they are saying don't bring it in public law, which is judicial review. Bring it in private law, which is contract."
McKay has been ordered to pay costs by the court. Matura-Shepherd says that she will discuss with McKay whether she wants to bring another case to fight the contractual aspect of her termination.
Email
Print