DAAWUUD Mohammed, who was left in limbo as he faced significant delays in being appointed a police officer, was victorious in the legal action he brought against the State. The court ordered that he be awarded $480,000 in damages with interest.Mohammed pursued judicial review and constitutional redress in relation to the prolonged delay in swearing him in as a police officer. He took action against the Commissioner of Police and the office of the Attorney General.Mohammed stated that, having successfully completed all stages of recruitment and training, he was scheduled to be sworn in with his fellow recruits as he believed he had satisfied all of the requirements that would have allowed this to be done.However, shortly before he was due to be sworn in, he was informed that this would not take place. No reasons were officially given. He was however informally told that there were issues relating to his background checks and that he would not be eligible to be sworn in unless this process was completed.Mohammed said that he faced uncertainty for months and all attempts to get clarification left him in a state of despair as no explanation, decision or timeline were given.He felt that he was being left behind as other recruits were advancing while he waited. He said that he was informed by the Commissioner of Police that background checks and his fitness of character had not been completed.The defendants relied on the affidavit of a senior superintendent assigned to the Police Academy. He said that the delay was due to ongoing investigations linked to alleged discrepancies surrounding sick leave records while Mohammed was a municipal police officer at the Point Fortin Borough Corporation. He said that no time frame could be given for the investigation.Mohammed however replied that the sick leave discrepancy was being raised for the first time. He also explained the issue of sick leave arose as a result of being injured on the job and all the enquires in relation to this were resolved in his favour in 2024.The judicial review aspect of the action was rendered academic as a result of Mohammed being sworn in as a police officer. Submission on this was therefore only related to costs.While the claimant sought costs, the defendants submitted that the judicial review application became academic not because of any unlawful unreasonable conduct by the defendants.The court however found that Mohammed was entitled to an award of costs in pursuing his judicial review claim. The court further found that there was a breach of his right to equality before the law and protection of the law under the Constitution,Justice Marcia Ayers-Caesar stated that the case revealed that Mohammed was placed in a position where he was in a prolonged state of uncertainty, that he was withheld a decision that impacted upon his legal status and affected his livelihood, while there was no timely, lawful or reasonable excuse.She noted that the case went further than just administrative inefficiencies and inordinate delays. Ayers-Caesar found that Mohammed was eligible to be sworn in as a police officer as no adverse findings had been made against him and no disciplinary charges had been taken against him, yet he was excluded from being sworn in for a period of some nine months. He was left in limbo, the court noted, as it added that a blatant disregard for procedural fairness was shown.On the issue of whether there was a breach of Mohammed’s right to equality of treatment from a public authority in the exercise of its function, the court had to determine whether the defendants’ decision to withhold his swearing in, despite his successful completion of the required training and the absence of any adverse finding against him, amounted to unequal treatment in the exercise of executive power.