JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, August 15, 2025

Jearlean appeals $17m dismissal from HDC

by

Derek Achong
1793 days ago
20200916
JERLEAN JOHN

JERLEAN JOHN

For­mer Hous­ing De­vel­op­ment Cor­po­ra­tion (HDC) man­ag­ing di­rec­tor Jear­lean John has ap­pealed the dis­missal of her $17 mil­lion un­fair dis­missal law­suit against her for­mer em­ploy­er.

In her no­tice of ap­peal, which was filed late last week and ob­tained by Guardian Me­dia, John’s lawyers raised sev­en grounds on which they be­lieve High Court Judge Kevin Ram­cha­ran made er­rors in find­ing that the board of the State-agency was en­ti­tled to dis­miss her.

They are con­tend­ing that in his judg­ment in ear­ly Au­gust, Ram­cha­ran failed to prop­er­ly as­sess the ev­i­dence pre­sent­ed at tri­al and did not pro­vide suf­fi­cient rea­sons for his find­ings.

A date for the hear­ing of the ap­peal is yet to be set by the Ap­peal Court’s Reg­istry.

Ac­cord­ing to the ev­i­dence, pre­sent­ed in the case, John and sev­en se­nior HDC em­ploy­ees were placed on ad­min­is­tra­tive leave af­ter a foren­sic au­dit was ini­ti­at­ed by the board short­ly af­ter it was ap­point­ed in De­cem­ber 2015. While the au­dit was still on­go­ing, HDC Chair­man New­man George and his fel­low board mem­bers in­vit­ed John to a meet­ing.

In their de­fence, the board mem­bers claimed that dur­ing the meet­ing on March 21, 2016, John was dis­re­spect­ful to them and dis­missed their con­cerns over the lease of two lux­u­ry ve­hi­cles. She was ter­mi­nat­ed the fol­low­ing day for her “re­ac­tion, de­meanour, tone and man­ner of com­mu­ni­cat­ing with the board of di­rec­tors”.

In her tes­ti­mo­ny, John de­nied that she was hos­tile to­wards the board mem­bers and claimed that she was am­bushed in the meet­ing as her re­peat­ed at­tempts to ob­tain an agen­da failed.

In his judg­ment sum­ma­ry, Ram­cha­ran not­ed that while there were no min­utes of the con­tro­ver­sial meet­ing, George gave a more ac­cu­rate ac­count of what tran­spired.

While Ram­cha­ran stat­ed that her con­duct was un­for­tu­nate and un­jus­ti­fi­able, he ac­cept­ed that she would have been jus­ti­fied in feel­ing am­bushed and blind­sided and ruled that her con­duct at the meet­ing was in­suf­fi­cient to war­rant her dis­missal.

How­ev­er, he stat­ed that her be­hav­iour cou­pled with her pre­vi­ous con­duct would have been con­sid­ered by the board in mak­ing its de­ci­sion.

“Every­thing must be tak­en in its prop­er con­text, and the re­ac­tion of the de­fen­dant to claimant’s con­duct at the meet­ing would nec­es­sar­i­ly by in­flu­enced by her pri­or con­duct,” Ram­cha­ran said.

Al­though he said that he did not con­sid­er the au­dit re­sults, he not­ed that the al­leged in­frac­tions al­leged­ly at­trib­uted to John would be in­suf­fi­cient to dis­miss her.

Ram­cha­ran said that even if she was wrong­ly dis­missed she would not have been en­ti­tled to pur­sue the law­suit in the form she did as her con­tract con­tained a clause al­low­ing for ter­mi­na­tion, pro­vid­ed that there was three months’ no­tice.

Through her law­suit, John was seek­ing $7.5 mil­lion in com­pen­sa­tion for her “loss of fu­ture em­ploy­ment op­por­tu­ni­ties”, $5 mil­lion for dam­age to her rep­u­ta­tion and $1.42 mil­lion for the eight and a half months, which she had left on her con­tract when she was ter­mi­nat­ed.

At the time, John’s month­ly pay pack­et con­sist­ed of a $62,000 salary and $36,000 in al­lowances for trav­el, hous­ing, com­mu­ni­ca­tions, and en­ter­tain­ment.

John was al­so claim­ing that she is en­ti­tled to an ad­di­tion­al 24 months salary as such a pro­vi­sion be­came a set­tled prac­tice of the HDC, with re­spect to de­part­ing man­ag­ing di­rec­tors, since the tenure of for­mer man­ag­ing di­rec­tor Noel Gar­cia.

John con­test­ed the La Hor­quet­ta/Tal­paro con­stituen­cy in the Au­gust 10 gen­er­al elec­tion for the Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress (UNC) but lost to Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment (PNM) can­di­date Fos­ter Cum­mings.

She has since been ap­point­ed an Op­po­si­tion Sen­a­tor.

John was rep­re­sent­ed by Ger­ald Ramdeen, Umesh Ma­haraj and Dayadai Har­ri­paul. Rus­sell Mar­tineau, SC, An­tho­ny Bul­lock and Mar­celle Fer­di­nand rep­re­sent­ed the HDC.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored