Lawyer for Christine Perriott removed from case

Christine Perriott versus Belize Telemedia Limited; it’s a highly publicized case that’s taken many turns in the courts. The most recent round went in favour of Telemedia. The background is that Perriott sued the utility company in 2007 because she felt her employment was wrongfully terminated. But Telemedia subsequently took issue with Perriott’s attorney, Lois Young, who worked as a legal advisor for the company from 1987 to 2001 and was privy to its confidential information. Telemedia sought an interim injunction to restrain Young from representing or even assisting Perriott in a claim for severance pay to avoid the risk of any information being disclosed. Justice John Muria, however, dismissed the application in July 2008 on the grounds that the information involving the case was already in public domain and that it was Young’s duty, as an attorney, not to disclose any confidential material on a former client. But Telemedia took the case to the Court of Appeal and was successful. The court made its ruling last Friday and upheld the application to have Young removed as Perriott’s attorney and also granted Belize Telemedia costs of court. Appeals Court judge Boyd Carey, stated in the ruling that Justice Muria misconceived the basis of Telemedia’s case when he ruled against Telemedia because Perriott withdrew her claim for severance and dismissal pay while the application for the injunction against Young was before the court. And according to Judge Carey, the real basis of the matter was that Young attended board meetings where labour laws and policies were discussed and that could have had a bearing on Perriott’s case. While the ruling closes this part of the case, it is unusual that it did reach the Court of Appeal, because counsels would ordinarily remove themselves in such circumstances.