Roberts v Air Jamaica Ltd and Others

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Judge: BROOKS, J.
• Judgment Date: 02 December 2009
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2009] 12 JJC 0201
• Date: 02 December 2009
• Court: Supreme Court (Jamaica)
• Docket Number: CLAIM NO. 2004 HCV 002969

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

IN CIVIL DIVISION

CLAIM NO. 2004 HCV 002969

BETWEEN

PATRICK ROBERTS

CLAIMANT

AND

AIR JAMAICA LIMITED

1 ^ST DEFENDANT

AND

DET. SGT. ALVON S. FERRON

2 ^ND DEFENDANT

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF JAMAICA

3 ^RD DEFENDANT

^st

^{nd rd}

FALSE IMPRISONMENT - Exemplary/Aggravated damages - Quantum

BROOKS, J

1 The twin threats of terrorism and drug trafficking facing the world have resulted in commercial air travel becoming an inconvenient, embarrassing and dehumanizing experience. States, in an effort to guard against these threats, have resorted to routinely searching the property and person of individuals who seek to use this moderately mundane mode of travel.

2 Mr. Patrick Roberts has, however, suffered greater indignity than a mere search. On October 16, 2000 he was removed from an aircraft in Kingston while he waited for it to take him to Florida. He was taken by police officers to the airport's police post, questioned, taken to another police station, questioned again and then finally released without charge. The eventual explanation for his unusual experience was that this was a case of mistaken identity.

3 He has filed this claim against the carrier, Air Jamaica Limited alleging that it improperly divulged to the authorities that he was on its flight, and against the detaining police officer and the Attorney General for false imprisonment. A judgment has been entered in respect of the claim for the false imprisonment and therefore the issues in that regard are the appropriate compensatory award to be made and whether aggravated and/or exemplary damages should be awarded.

4 Air Jamaica has however resisted the claim and the issues to be decided, as against it, are whether there is any element of confidentiality in the contract of carriage between Air Jamaica and Mr. Roberts and whether Air Jamaica has breached that contract. I shall treat first, with the contractual issues and thereafter with the issues influencing the award of damages.

5 The Contractual issues

6 The pleadings

7 In his amended Particulars of Claim Mr. Roberts pleaded that there "was an express and/or an implied term...of the contract for the purchase of [his] ticket that [his] travel arrangements would remain private and confidential between [him] and [Air Jamaica]". He further pleaded that "[by] reason of [Air Jamaica's] breach of contract and (sic) confidentiality with [him] in releasing his flight information to [the police] and others [he] has suffered loss..."

8 The evidence

9 The evidence which was adduced to support these aspects of the pleading came from Mr. Roberts. He stated that he purchased a return ticket to travel from Florida to Jamaica and return. He successfully completed the first leg on October 13, 2000, spent three days in the island and boarded the designated aircraft expecting to be returned safely to his destination.

10 I shall describe anon, the manner in which he came to be detained but for the present purposes need only say that he was asked to deplane and when he complied he was met at the foot of the stairs leading from the airplane, by the second Defendant Sergeant Ferron.

11 The next relevant bit of evidence is that having been, later, released from detention and seeking to get another later flight out of the island, Mr. Roberts solicited the assistance of Sgt. Ferron. He says he then witnessed a discussion between Sgt. Ferron and the Air Jamaica supervisor who was then creating the ticket for his later flight. Mr. Roberts continues at paragraph 27 of his witness statement thus:

"Sgt. Ferron says he acted because he was summoned by Air Jamaica and the Air Jamaica supervisor said they called him because my name matched a name on the list of restricted people the police provided the airline."

12 According to Mr. Roberts' counsel, Miss Cummings, an incident occurring after that discussion made it clear that it was Air Jamaica which was instrumental in the police preventing "his originally scheduled departure. The incident occurred when Mr. Roberts attempted to board his later flight. He was "again detained at the security check point before boarding". Mr. Roberts' used forceful action which ensured that that incident was brief. Learned Counsel also submitted that the fact that Air Jamaica gave Mr. Roberts a J$100.00 meal voucher and allowed him to travel without the payment of a further fee meant that Air Jamaica was compensating him for its action.

13 The law

14 In respect of the law, Miss Cummings submitted that a duty of confidentiality was imposed by this contract of carriage arising from the purchase of the ticket. She submitted that a term of confidentiality may be implied in circumstances where "confidentiality is clearly called for in the context of the relationship existing between the parties."

15 Learned Counsel cited in support, the case of Reigate v Union Manufacturing Co. (Ramsbottom) Ltd. and anor. [1918] 1 K.B. 592. At page 605 of the report Scrutton, L.J. stated, however, that a term will only be implied into a contract if it is necessary to give business efficacy to the contract. In order to determine what is inferred, said the learned Law...