Derek Achong
A High Court Judge has stated that citizens should not be precluded from accessing justice due to a lack of financial resources.
Justice Frank Seepersad made the statement on Tuesday as he upheld an application from a man from Point Fortin to continue his medical negligence lawsuit, despite it being filed outside the statutory limit for bringing such cases. Justice Seepersad said, “The court does not only serve the wealthy or the connected, it serves all citizens and, irrespective of their circumstance, must ensure that each and every citizen is afforded an opportunity to have reasonable access to the judicial system.”
“This court firmly believes that once it is equitable, fair, and reasonable, it should always judiciously exercise any vested discretion in a manner which aids in the determination of disputes instituted by the poor, vulnerable or disenfranchised and in this case, the claimant’s plight cannot be lightly disregarded,” he added.
The case brought by Hollis Williams related to a hand injury he sustained in a chopping incident in August 2015. He was taken to the Point Fortin Hospital, and doctors recommended that he undergo tendon graft surgery at the San Fernando General Hospital. He complied and participated in physiotherapy at the hospital’s Orthopaedic Clinic. He continued to experience pain and limited movement in his fingers and was eventually assessed as being ten per cent permanently partially disabled.
In 2019, Williams applied to the Legal Aid and Advisory Authority (LAAA) for assistance in pursuing a negligence lawsuit. His case was reassigned several times before it was assigned to attorney Aaron Patrick, who filed the case last year. Williams also claimed that he was delayed as he needed time to source the finances necessary to hire a medical expert for the case.
Attorneys for the South West Regional Health Authority (SWRHA), which manages both facilities, claimed that the case should be struck out as it was filed outside the four-year statutory limit under the Limitation of Certain Actions Act.
In determining the application, Justice Seepersad noted that the period would have elapsed in October 2020 but was extended to November 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Justice Seepersad found that Williams’ explanations for the delay were reasonable.
“The explanations outlined in the claimant’s affidavit cannot properly be characterised as being indicative of conduct which was dilatory or laissez-faire,” Justice Seepersad said.
“It is obvious that he has limited financial resources, and although he applied for legal aid, his application was accompanied by challenges,” he added.
Justice Seepersad noted that Williams was only able to secure the services of the medical expert after Patrick was appointed in 2023.
“The court readily accepts that there was some delay in acquiring the expert medical report, but the evidence demonstrates that delay which ensued was in large measure attributable to facts and circumstances which were outside the claimant’s control,” he said.
Justice Seepersad noted that the authority claimed it would be prejudiced as its staff could not remember details of Williams’ treatment and locate some of his medical records.
However, he noted that Williams would face greater prejudice if he was not allowed to pursue the case.
Justice Seepersad’s ruling on the application now means that Williams’ case will go to trial at a later date.
Williams was also represented by Kristen Bansraj and Govinda Tiwari. The SWRHA was represented by Anand Ramlogan, SC, Ganesh Saroop, Amirah Ramdass, Seth Ramsden, and Vishaal Siewsaran.
