4-Feb-11
START DATE
END DATE
14-Feb-11
Susann Smith v Minister of Culture and Social Rehabilitation
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
CIVIL JURISDICTION Human Rights
Kawaley J
Applicant in Person
Mr. Melvin Douglas, Deputy Solicitor-General & Ms. Wendy Greenidge (Attorney-General?s Chambers)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Susann Smith applied for judicial review of a decision by the Minister of Culture and Social Rehabilitation not to refer her human rights complaint to a board of inquiry under the Human Rights Act 1981. She had filed a complaint in 2004 against the Minister of the Environment, alleging discrimination in licensing her to practice veterinary medicine. The Human Rights Commission (HRC) initially dismissed her complaint, but later reversed its decision based on a report from the Ombudsman. The Acting Minister refused to refer the case, arguing that the HRC had no authority to reconsider its earlier dismissal.
SUMMARY:
(1) Did the HRC have the legal authority to reopen a previously dismissed complaint? (2) Was the Minister?s decision procedurally unfair? (3) Did the Minister's role create an appearance of bias?
OUTCOMES:
Decision quashed; case remitted to Minister for reconsideration.
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Susann Smith (Plaintiff)
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Susann Smith v Minister of Culture and Social Rehabilitation
Susann Smith applied for judicial review of a decision by the Minister of Culture and Social Rehabilitation not to refer her human rights complaint to a board of inquiry under the Human Rights Act 1981. She had filed a complaint in 2004 against the Minister of the Environment, alleging discrimination in licensing her to practice veterinary medicine. The Human Rights Commission (HRC) initially dismissed her complaint, but later reversed its decision based on a report from the Ombudsman. The Acting Minister refused to refer the case, arguing that the HRC had no authority to reconsider its earlier dismissal.