Judiciary Promises More Public Disclosure
In response to a Freedom of Information request from Anthony Dopson, the Judiciary of Trinidad and Tobago has disclosed information on outstanding decisions and judgements of judicial officers in the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
In a voluminous eight-document release, the Judiciary of Trinidad and Tobago noted that the data provided was as of November 25th, 2025, and covers judges of the Court of Appeal and High Court, as well as masters and registrars.
The Judiciary apologised to court users who have experienced lengthy delays and outlined several measures to improve performance, including enhanced monitoring, training, mentoring, data collection, and regular public reporting.
It includes matters such as reserved judgements outstanding for more than six months, unresolved decisions on costs, statements of costs filed but not yet assessed, outstanding reasons for appeal, and cases over the past five years where High Court decisions were overturned by the Court of Appeal.
The release was in response to a Freedom of Information request sent by Oilfield Trade Union branch secretary Anthony Dopson.
The main release from the Judiciary stated that, in keeping with its commitment to transparency and public accountability, it chose to release the information simultaneously to the media.
To this end, judicial officers were required to review their case dockets and self-report outstanding matters, while registrars examined hundreds of Court of Appeal orders dating back to 2020, in the absence of previously compiled statistics on overturned judgements.
The Judiciary noted that there are no fixed timelines in law for the delivery of judgements in Trinidad and Tobago, although six months is generally regarded as a reasonable period in most cases. It also pointed out that many decisions are delivered within that timeframe, including oral judgements, and that even the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sometimes delivers judgements beyond six months.
Citing its Guidelines for Judicial Conduct, the Judiciary reaffirmed that judges are required to deliver decisions with reasonable promptness, while acknowledging that illness, workload, and the complexity of cases can affect timelines.
The disclosure, it said, is part of a broader effort to strengthen public trust and confidence in the justice system and to ensure the timely delivery of justice.
