After lengthy legal battle, Judiciary confirms: Ayers-Caesar returns to High Court duty

JUSTICE Marcia Ayers-Caesar is once again a High Court judge, returning to the bench in May after a long legal battle that lasted nearly eight years.

In March, the Privy Council ruled that her 2017 resignation was unlawfully forced by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC), led by Chief Justice Ivor Archie.

The apex court held that her removal was unfair and violated constitutional procedures for the removal of a judge. The ruling said the commission put pressure on Ayers-Caesar by threatening disciplinary action, instead of following the proper constitutional process under Section 137.

The ruling meant Ayers-Caesar was entitled to return to the bench and the salary she would have earned since her appointment on April 12, 2017.

The Judiciary, on June 4, confirmed her return.

"The Honourable Mme. Justice Ayers-Caesar, Puisne Judge, resumed effective May 5, 2025 and is currently assigned to the Civil High Court."

The Privy Council said she had been pressured to resign over a backlog of cases she left as chief magistrate and agreed with a 2023 ruling by the Court of Appeal, which said the JLSC acted outside its powers.

Ayers-Caesar served as a High Court judge for just two weeks in 2017. Before that, she was the country’s first female chief magistrate. Concerns arose soon after her swearing-in when it was revealed she had left at least 52 partly heard cases in the magistrates’ court.

Chief Justice Archie said he was unaware of the full backlog when she was promoted and believed it was mostly simple matters that could be reassigned easily. When the full number of unfinished cases came to light, the JLSC held an emergency meeting.

Rather than starting formal disciplinary action, the commission gave Ayers-Caesar the choice to resign or face possible removal proceedings. She resigned that same day, later claiming she was pressured by the JLSC in that she was told to sign an already-prepared resignation letter, or her appointment would be revoked by then President Anthony Carmona.

She said the JLSC acted unlawfully in seeking her resignation as a judge, unlawfully procured her resignation and acted unlawfully in treating her consequent purported resignation as effective.

She filed a judicial review claim in July 2018 against the JLSC and the Attorney General, also seeking relief against the president for refusing to set aside her resignation letter and reinstate her as a judge.

Trial judge David Harris dismissed her claim against the President. In 2021, he rejected her case against the JLSC and the Attorney General.

Ayers-Caesar then took her case to the Court of Appeal, who ruled in 2023, that the JLSC acted illegally when it forced her to resign. In their ruling, the Appeal Court said Harris erred, misconstrued and misapplied the law. As a result, it reviewed the case and the evidence afresh.

The State challenged this ruling before the Privy Council, who ruled on March 24 that Ayers-Caesar’s resignation was not truly voluntary, and that she was denied a fair chance to respond to the complaints. The court said disciplinary procedures, if needed, should have been handled by a tribunal and possibly referred to the Privy Council.

Negotiations on her compensation, including the salary she is owed and damages as well as costs are expected to begin in the following weeks.

Ayers-Caesar was admitted as an attorney in 1986, appointed as a magistrate in 1992, and became chief magistrate in 2010. She was sworn in as a judge on April 12, 2017.

Approached for comment on June 4, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, who represented Ayers-Caesar before the Privy Council, said,

“The judicial system has worked because it has vindicated the wrong which was done to her, and it is an important victory for the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.”