A landmark legal challenge has rocked Barbados’ judicial sector, as retired High Court Justice Dr. Sonia Richards has brought a sweeping constitutional claim against the state of Barbados and its former top judicial officer, Sir Patterson Cheltenham. The unprecedented suit alleges multiple violations of Richards’ fundamental constitutional rights, including being unlawfully locked out of her official chambers and pushed out of her judicial post against established law.
Filed by Richards last year and formally served on all named respondents just last week, the 25-page legal filing lays out a detailed series of grievances against the two defendants: the Office of the Attorney General, listed as the first respondent, and Sir Patterson, named in his former capacity as Chief Justice at the time of the alleged incidents. Richards, who was appointed to the High Court bench in April 2006 and formally left the judiciary in May 2022 at the age of 66, outlines multiple claims against the pair, including breach of constitutional protections, defamation, violation of her judicial employment terms, and severe personal harm stemming from the alleged actions.
Per the court documents dated April 4, 2025, Richards is seeking multiple legal remedies, including exemplary and vindicatory damages, legal costs permitted for two senior counsel, accrued interest, and any additional relief the court deems appropriate. She has also asked the court to issue formal declarations confirming that the respondents violated core constitutional rights: protection against uncompensated property seizure, right to equal protection under the law, and protection against inhumane or degrading treatment.
The core incident at the center of the suit dates back to April 2022, just over a month before Richards’ scheduled retirement. Richards alleges that on April 6, 2022, Sir Patterson ordered her to surrender her official building access swipe card and office keys, a demand she refused. Six days later, when she arrived for work at the Supreme Court Complex on White Park Road, she found neither her key nor swipe card worked to grant entry. Though security escorted her into the building, she discovered the lock to her office had been replaced, and her nameplate had been removed from the door. When she ultimately gained entry to the space, she found unfamiliar files left inside, and later learned an acting judge had already been assigned to use the office. While her access card was reactivated shortly before her official retirement, she never received a replacement office key, she claims.
Beyond the April 2022 lockout incident, Richards alleges the event was the end result of years of unfair treatment in her role. She claims she was consistently assigned a heavier caseload than her fellow judges, routinely working until 9 or 10 p.m. on weekdays. The retired justice also argues the lockout amounted to defamation, as it implied to fellow judicial staff, legal practitioners, and the general public that she had acted improperly and no longer held authority to occupy her office.
On the matter of her tenure extension, Richards notes that six months before she turned 65—the mandatory retirement age for judges without an extension—she submitted a formal request to the prime minister for a two-year extension of her term. She was ultimately granted only a one-year extension by the then-governor general, but she alleges the required consultation between herself and the viceroy, mandated under Section 84(1A) of the Barbados Constitution, never took place.
Richards says the alleged actions of the defendants and other senior judicial and government officials left her with severe negative health impacts, including clinical depression, social withdrawal, loss of appetite, chronic insomnia, and a reluctance to leave her home.
When contacted for comment this Tuesday, Attorney General Wilfred Abrahams declined to share further details beyond confirming he was aware of the legal action. Sir Patterson, however, issued an emphatic denial of all claims during an exclusive interview with Barbados TODAY. “I reject all of the assertions in there… deny all, reject all,” the former Chief Justice stated. He added that he had already held preliminary discussions with the Attorney General about legal representation, and was waiting for confirmation on which external counsel would be assigned to defend him in the case. No hearing date has been scheduled for the suit as of yet.