Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and 15 others (Trinidad and Tobago)

[2023] UKPC 27
Some auditors didn't get temporary promotions because they lacked a special qualification. A court wrongly said everyone needed that qualification for temporary jobs, even those not requiring it. A higher court fixed that mistake, but the auditors still lost because there were other good reasons they weren't promoted.

Key Facts

  • Sixteen auditors (appellants) challenged the Inland Revenue's (respondent's) failure to recommend them for acting appointments as Field Auditor III.
  • The dispute centered on whether a professional accounting qualification was required for non-prelude acting appointments as Field Auditor III.
  • Appellants possessed tertiary qualifications and extensive experience but lacked professional accounting qualifications.
  • The Court of Appeal held that a professional accounting qualification was a necessary threshold condition for all appointments as Field Auditor III, including acting appointments.
  • The appellants' claim was based on alleged unlawfulness of the failure to recommend them for non-prelude acting appointments.

Legal Principles

Public Service Commission (PSC) Regulations govern appointments, promotions, and transfers in the public service.

Public Service Commission Regulations

For non-prelude acting appointments, the senior eligible officer is generally appointed.

Public Service Commission Regulations, Regulation 26(1)(a)

Eligibility criteria for substantive and prelude acting appointments do not automatically apply to non-prelude acting appointments.

Ramoutar v Commissioner of Prisons [2012] UKPC 29

The Commission considers seniority, experience, qualifications, merit, and ability when considering promotions.

Public Service Commission Regulations, Regulation 18

Specifications for a particular office must be considered during the appointment process.

Public Service Commission Regulations, Regulation 18(4)

Outcomes

The Privy Council dismissed the appeal.

The Court of Appeal erred in its reasoning by not distinguishing between requirements for substantive, prelude acting, and non-prelude acting appointments. However, the appellants' claim failed because there was no evidence the respondent's failure to recommend them stemmed from a mistaken belief about the qualification requirement; other reasons for the non-recommendations existed.

No declaration was made that Field Auditors II can be appointed to non-prelude acting Field Auditor III positions.

There was no finding of unlawful conduct by the public body. The judgment itself clarifies the legal position.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.