A High Court judge has set July 21-23 next year for hearing the defamation claim brought by Youth Development and National Service Minister, Foster Cummings, against opposition United National Congress (UNC) legislator, Jayanti Lutchmedial-Ramdial.
Justice Nadia Kangaloo set the trial dates at a pre-trial review after ruling on evidential objections. She also set the dates for the minister’s second defamation claim against Lutchmedial-Ramdial on the last day of the trial in July.
Cummings filed a defamation lawsuit against Lutchmedial-Ramdial, claiming that he was defamed when, on May 5, 2022, at a UNC public meeting, she revealed the contents of a Special Branch report, which she said she received in her mailbox from a whistleblower.
The Express newspaper republished the unedited contents of the police report after Lutchmedial-Ramdial disclosed it at the meeting.
Lutchmedial-Ramdial later posted a statement on her Facebook account about the allegations, calling for the police to thoroughly investigate them.
In his lawsuit, Cummings contended the report was “private and confidential” and should not have been revealed to the public.
But on May 16, 2022, at another UNC public meeting, Lutchmedial-Ramdial presented several documents, including a source-of-funds declaration form, two letters of award and a cheque, which all referenced Cummings, which she again posted on her Facebook page.
He subsequently sought an injunction to restrain Lutchmedial from reposting corruption allegations against him on her social media accounts.
On June 10, 2022, Justice Kangaloo dismissed his injunction application, ruling that the information Cummings sought to classify as confidential could be in the public domain, as he is a politically exposed person.
In February, the Appeal Court allowed Cummings to reply to Lutchmedial’s defence by introducing evidence to rebut some of her contentions.
In June, the minister also filed his novel constitutional claim against the State over the “leaked” Special Branch report as he sought to have his name cleared.
Cummings is seeking compensation for the “gross violation” of his rights to private life, the misuse of his private information and for breach of confidence by the State through the actions of the police by disclosing information in the Special Branch note which identified him as a subject of a police investigation.
He is also seeking redress for the “repeated acts of disclosure” of his information by the disclosure of the status of the investigation.
