Court Rules DPP Can Be Sued
The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has ruled that the Director of Public Prosecutions and a senior police officer can remain defendants in a malicious prosecution lawsuit filed by retired Deputy Commissioner of Police Alwin James. The decision overturns an earlier ruling that removed the officials from the case following a dismissed 2022 ammunition charge. The appellate court affirmed that public officers are not automatically shielded from personal liability in tort claims.
The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has delivered a significant ruling allowing a malicious prosecution lawsuit against the Director of Public Prosecutions and Police Chief Inspector Louis Buckley to proceed. The civil action was brought forward by retired Deputy Commissioner of Police Alwin James following the dismissal of criminal charges previously laid against him.
The appellate court overturned a March 2025 high court order that had removed both the DPP and Chief Inspector Buckley as named defendants in the lawsuit. The legal action also names the Commissioner of Police and the Attorney General as parties to the matter. The appeal strictly addressed whether James could directly sue the individual officials, leaving the underlying merits of his malicious prosecution claim to be determined at trial.
The dispute originates from a July 2022 charge against James for unlawful possession of explosives. Authorities alleged that the retired senior officer attempted to transport 50 rounds of ammunition out of the Virgin Islands without the requisite permission from the Commissioner of Police.
James subsequently relocated to Dominica and was never formally served with the summons. Following the expiration of the summons, a magistrate declined to reissue it, determining that doing so would constitute an abuse of the court process. Following the dismissal of the charge, James filed suit seeking damages for malicious prosecution.
He alleged that Chief Inspector Buckley laid the charge under the Commissioner's name and that the DPP reviewed or arranged the review of the police evidence before sanctioning the prosecution. The appeal turned largely on the interpretation of Section 13 of the Crown Proceedings Act and the scope of prosecutorial immunity.
The appellate judges held that while Section 13 regulates proceedings against the Crown, it does not prevent a public officer from being sued personally for an alleged civil wrong committed in the course of their official duties. Addressing prosecutorial immunity, the judges confirmed that malicious prosecution claims against prosecutors are maintainable under common law, although the legal threshold to prove malice and a lack of reasonable and probable cause remains exceptionally high.
The court awarded James legal costs for the appeal proceedings.
Primary source: BVI News