Breach of Confidence and Privacy Law in Trinidad and Tobago
Trinidad and Tobago has a Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago (Act 13 of 2011), but as of April 2026 only a small portion of that Act has been brought into force — the substantive enforcement provisions, including individuals' rights to access their data and seek compensation for breaches, remain unproclaimed and no Information Commissioner has been appointed. In practice, people in Trinidad and Tobago who wish to protect their private information — including intimate photographs shared without consent — must rely on common law breach of confidence, a constitutional motion under Section 4(i) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Chapter 1:01, or both. The High Court applied common law breach of confidence to intimate images in the landmark case of Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons (CV 2014-01949) and awarded TT$150,000 in damages.
What Is Breach of Confidence?
Breach of confidence is an equitable cause of action that protects private or confidential information from being disclosed or misused without the consent of the person to whom the obligation of confidence is owed. It is not created by statute in Trinidad and Tobago — it is a remedy developed by courts of equity over centuries, and it is fully available in the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago.
In Trinidad and Tobago, a claimant relying on breach of confidence must satisfy the three-part test from Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41, which T&T courts have adopted and applied:
- The information must possess the necessary quality of confidence — it must not be in the public domain or common knowledge.
- The information must have been imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence — that is, a reasonable person in the position of the recipient would have understood that the information was private.
- There must be unauthorised use of that information to the detriment of the party communicating it.
Each limb must be satisfied. It is not enough that information feels private — the claimant must show that the circumstances in which it was shared created an obligation to keep it confidential.
The Landmark Case: Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons
Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons (CV 2014-01949) is the most significant privacy case decided by the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago to date, and the first to apply common law breach of confidence to intimate photographs — what is colloquially called "revenge porn."
The facts were as follows. The claimant and the respondent — West Indies cricketer Lendl Simmons — had been in a consensual romantic relationship. Intimate photographs taken during that relationship were subsequently distributed by Simmons via social media and on Viber to his teammates after the relationship ended. The claimant sought emergency legal relief.
On 5 June 2014, Justice Boodoosingh granted an urgent injunction preventing further dissemination of the photographs. The matter then proceeded to a full hearing before Justice Frank Seepersad, who delivered judgment on 26 October 2015. Justice Seepersad found that all three limbs of the Coco test were satisfied: the photographs were plainly confidential in nature, they were created and shared in circumstances that imported an obligation of confidence (a private relationship), and the distribution to third parties was an unauthorised use causing clear detriment to the claimant.
The court awarded TT$150,000 in damages — establishing both the availability of the remedy and a concrete quantum reference point for future intimate image cases in Trinidad and Tobago.
The significance of this decision cannot be overstated. At the time, Trinidad and Tobago had no statute specifically criminalising the non-consensual sharing of intimate images (and none has been enacted as of April 2026). The court's willingness to apply breach of confidence in this context means that victims do not need to wait for legislation — the common law remedy is available now, and urgently.
Remedies for Breach of Confidence
A successful claimant in a breach of confidence action in Trinidad and Tobago can obtain three distinct categories of relief: an injunction to prevent further disclosure, an award of compensatory damages, and an account of profits.
Injunctions
Because breach of confidence is an equitable remedy, the court has a wide discretion to grant injunctions. Critically, injunctions can be obtained urgently — on an ex parte basis (without notice to the defendant) where disclosure is imminent or continuing, as occurred in Therese Ho v Simmons. An ex parte injunction can be sought as a matter of emergency, sometimes within hours of the claimant first attending a lawyer. The injunction restrains the respondent from further distributing the confidential information.
Damages
Damages are assessed to compensate the claimant for the distress, embarrassment, and harm to reputation caused by the breach. In intimate image cases, the courts acknowledge the profound personal harm caused — as demonstrated by the TT$150,000 award in Therese Ho v Simmons. Future courts will use that award as a benchmark, and higher awards are possible where the dissemination is wider, the conduct more deliberate, or the harm more severe.
Account of Profits
Where the defendant has made a profit from the misuse of confidential information — for example, by selling photographs or licensing private data — the claimant may elect to receive an account of the defendant's profits rather than damages. This remedy is particularly relevant in commercial breach of confidence cases.
Limitation Periods
Because breach of confidence is an equitable cause of action rather than a common law tort, the strict limitation periods that apply to tort claims are less rigidly applied. Courts retain some flexibility in equity, though delay remains a factor in the court's exercise of discretion. Claimants should nonetheless act promptly — particularly because injunctions are most effective when sought urgently.
The Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 — What Is and Is Not in Force
The Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago (Act 13 of 2011, assented to on 22 June 2011) was designed to regulate the collection, processing, and storage of personal data by public and private sector data controllers. Its ambition is significant — it provides for data subject rights, registration of data controllers, enforcement powers, and the appointment of an Information Commissioner.
However, as of April 2026, only a narrow portion of the Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 has been brought into force. Only Part I (preliminary provisions) and specific sections of Part II — Sections 7 to 18 and Sections 22, 23, 25(1), 26, and 28 — came into force on 6 January 2012. The remaining substantive provisions of the Act, including the full enforcement regime, individuals' rights to access their data, rights to rectification, and rights to compensation for data breaches, have not been proclaimed.
No Information Commissioner has been appointed. The office established by the Act to enforce its provisions does not yet exist in operational form. This means that the enforcement infrastructure envisioned by the Act — the ability of an individual to file a complaint, have it investigated, and obtain relief through the Commissioner — is not currently available.
The following table sets out precisely what is and is not in force as of April 2026:
| Provision | Status (as of April 2026) |
|---|---|
| Part I — Preliminary (definitions, application) | In force (since 6 January 2012) |
| Part II, Sections 7–18 — Registration and notification obligations for data controllers | In force (since 6 January 2012) |
| Part II, Sections 22, 23, 25(1), 26, 28 — Specific data controller duties | In force (since 6 January 2012) |
| Data subject right to access personal data held about them | NOT in force |
| Data subject right to rectification of inaccurate data | NOT in force |
| Right to compensation for data breaches | NOT in force |
| Appointment and powers of the Information Commissioner | NOT in force |
| Full enforcement regime and complaints procedure | NOT in force |
| Criminal offences and penalties for unlawful data processing | NOT in force |
The practical consequence is that data subjects in Trinidad and Tobago currently have no effective statutory remedy for data protection breaches. The Act exists; the enforcement regime does not. Until the remaining provisions are proclaimed and an Information Commissioner is appointed, individuals who have had their personal data misused must seek relief through other routes: common law breach of confidence, a constitutional motion, or civil action in tort.
The Constitutional Right to Privacy
Under Section 4(i) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Chapter 1:01, every person has the right to respect for private and family life — and this is a fundamental right enforceable by the High Court.
Section 14 of the Constitution provides that any person who alleges that their fundamental rights and freedoms have been breached may apply to the High Court for redress. This constitutional route is available where no other adequate remedy exists. In the context of privacy, a constitutional motion could be brought where, for example, a state authority or state-connected body has unlawfully disclosed private information.
The constitutional right to privacy has also been engaged in the broader context of personal autonomy. In Jason Jones v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (CV 2017-00720), the High Court in 2018 declared Sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act unconstitutional as infringements of the right to privacy and freedom under Section 4 of the Constitution. That case is now on appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC 2025-0095) and the outcome will have significant implications for the reach and content of the constitutional privacy right in Trinidad and Tobago.
What Remedies Are Available If the DPA Enforcement Provisions Are Not Proclaimed?
In the absence of a fully proclaimed Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04, persons in Trinidad and Tobago whose private information has been misused have three available routes: common law breach of confidence, a constitutional motion under Section 14 read with Section 4(i) of the Constitution, and civil action in tort for misuse of private information where the facts support it.
Each route has different requirements and is suited to different factual situations:
-
Common law breach of confidence — the most direct and well-established route in private law. It applies where confidential information (including intimate images, medical records, private communications, or commercially sensitive data) has been shared in circumstances importing confidence and then misused. Urgency is available through ex parte injunctions.
-
Constitutional motion — appropriate where a state actor is involved in the breach of privacy, or where the breach of private and family life under Section 4(i) of the Constitution is so serious that declaratory and compensatory relief under Section 14 is warranted. The constitutional route involves a higher threshold but allows for a direct challenge where the common law remedy may not fully apply.
-
Civil action in tort — while T&T has not yet fully adopted a standalone "misuse of private information" tort in the way English courts have developed it post-Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] 2 AC 457, the direction of travel of the common law — particularly given the Therese Ho decision — suggests that T&T courts would be receptive to such claims in appropriate cases.
CARICOM Context and the Regional Picture
Trinidad and Tobago is not alone in having a data protection statute that is largely inoperative in practice. Most Caribbean jurisdictions that have enacted data protection legislation have done so without yet building functional enforcement capacity. CARICOM has been working toward a regional data protection framework for a number of years, but as of April 2026 that framework is not yet in place.
Jamaica's Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) is the most operationally advanced data protection authority in the English-speaking Caribbean, having been established under Jamaica's Data Protection Act 2020 and beginning to accept and investigate complaints. The contrast with Trinidad and Tobago — where the equivalent officer has not been appointed fifteen years after the Act was assented to — illustrates the implementation gap that exists across the region.
Until a functioning regional framework and national enforcement structures are in place, private law remedies and constitutional rights will continue to carry the full weight of privacy protection in T&T.
Practical Guidance for Common Situations
If someone has shared intimate photographs of you without your consent: Apply urgently to the High Court for an injunction under common law breach of confidence, relying on Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons (CV 2014-01949) as direct authority. You do not need to wait for legislation. An ex parte injunction can be obtained without notice to the defendant where there is urgency. Take legal advice immediately — the earlier the injunction application is made, the more effective it is.
If your employer or a company has misused your personal data: As of April 2026, the enforcement provisions of the Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 are not in force, meaning you cannot file a complaint with an Information Commissioner. You will need to pursue relief through common law breach of confidence (if the data was imparted in circumstances importing confidence), or via constitutional motion if a state body is involved. Legal advice should be sought promptly.
If your medical records or private communications have been disclosed without consent: The three-part Coco test will be easily satisfied in most such cases — medical records and private communications are paradigm cases of confidential information imparted in circumstances of confidence. Seek legal advice on both the injunction and damages routes.
What the Law Says in Trinidad and Tobago
| Statute | Relevance |
|---|---|
| Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 (Act 13 of 2011) | Regulates the collection and processing of personal data; only partially proclaimed as of April 2026 — enforcement provisions and Information Commissioner not yet operational |
| Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Chapter 1:01, Section 4(i) | Guarantees the fundamental right to respect for private and family life; enforceable by constitutional motion under Section 14 |
| Common law — breach of confidence (equitable doctrine) | Protects confidential information from unauthorised disclosure or use; three-part Coco test applied by T&T courts; available now without further legislation |
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Trinidad and Tobago have a privacy law?
Trinidad and Tobago has the Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago (Act 13 of 2011), but as of April 2026 only a fraction of that Act is in force. Only Part I and certain sections of Part II (Sections 7–18, 22, 23, 25(1), 26, and 28) have been proclaimed, and those provisions deal mainly with registration obligations for data controllers. The substantive enforcement regime — including individuals' rights to access their data, rights to seek compensation for data breaches, and the powers of the Information Commissioner — has not been proclaimed. No Information Commissioner has been appointed. In practice, privacy protection in Trinidad and Tobago rests on the common law doctrine of breach of confidence and the constitutional right to private and family life under Section 4(i) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Chapter 1:01.
What is the test for breach of confidence in Trinidad and Tobago?
The three-part test from Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41, adopted by T&T courts, applies. The claimant must establish: first, that the information has the necessary quality of confidence (it is not in the public domain); second, that it was imparted in circumstances that imported an obligation of confidence (a reasonable person would have understood it was private); and third, that there was unauthorised use of the information to the detriment of the claimant. All three elements must be proved on a balance of probabilities. The equitable nature of the cause of action means the court has a broad discretion over relief, including the power to grant injunctions and award damages.
Can I stop someone from sharing my intimate photographs in Trinidad and Tobago?
Yes. The High Court of Trinidad and Tobago has jurisdiction to grant an injunction under common law breach of confidence to prevent the disclosure or further dissemination of intimate photographs. In Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons (CV 2014-01949), Justice Boodoosingh granted an urgent ex parte injunction on 5 June 2014 — meaning it was obtained without the other side being present — preventing further sharing of intimate images. Justice Seepersad subsequently awarded TT$150,000 in damages. You do not need to wait for legislation. If you are in this situation, seek legal advice immediately so that an urgent application can be made, as the earlier an injunction is obtained, the more effective it is in limiting harm.
What damages can I recover for breach of confidence in T&T?
The damages awarded in breach of confidence cases in Trinidad and Tobago are compensatory — they are intended to compensate the claimant for the harm suffered, including distress, embarrassment, and damage to reputation. In Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons (CV 2014-01949), the court awarded TT$150,000 in a case involving the non-consensual distribution of intimate photographs via social media and Viber. That figure provides a benchmark for future intimate image cases, and higher awards are possible where the dissemination is wider, the conduct more deliberate, or the emotional and reputational harm more severe. Where the defendant has made a profit from the misuse of the confidential information, the claimant may instead elect an account of profits.
Can I complain to an Information Commissioner in Trinidad and Tobago about my personal data?
No — not as of April 2026. Although the Data Protection Act, Chapter 22:04 provides for the appointment of an Information Commissioner with powers to investigate complaints and enforce individuals' data rights, those provisions of the Act have not been proclaimed and no Information Commissioner has been appointed. The enforcement infrastructure simply does not exist in operational form. If your personal data has been misused, you must currently seek relief through common law breach of confidence, a constitutional motion under Section 14 read with Section 4(i) of the Constitution, or civil action in tort. Readers should obtain current legal advice on the operational status of any data protection enforcement body at the time of their enquiry, as the position may change.
How does the constitutional right to privacy work in Trinidad and Tobago?
Section 4(i) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Chapter 1:01 guarantees every person the right to respect for private and family life as a fundamental right. Where that right has been infringed — particularly by a state actor or body connected to the state — a person may apply to the High Court under Section 14 of the Constitution for redress, which can include declarations, damages, and injunctions. The constitutional route is distinct from common law breach of confidence and can be used alongside it or where the common law remedy does not fully apply. In Jason Jones v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (CV 2017-00720), the High Court relied on the Section 4 privacy right in striking down criminal provisions of the Sexual Offences Act in 2018; that case is currently before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC 2025-0095).
Does it matter if the information was shared on social media versus privately?
Under the law of breach of confidence in Trinidad and Tobago, the medium of disclosure does not limit the remedy — what matters is whether the three-part Coco test is satisfied. Information shared on social media or via messaging platforms such as Viber, WhatsApp, or Facebook is treated the same way as any other act of unauthorised disclosure. Indeed, wider dissemination generally results in greater harm and therefore higher damages. In Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons, the distribution via social media and Viber to the respondent's teammates was treated as a serious breach, and the court had no difficulty granting both an injunction and substantial damages notwithstanding that the images were shared through personal and social communication channels rather than a formal publication.
Is "revenge porn" a criminal offence in Trinidad and Tobago?
As of April 2026, there is no specific statute in Trinidad and Tobago that criminalises the non-consensual sharing of intimate images (commonly called "revenge porn"). The Therese Ho v Lendl Simmons case was decided on civil grounds — breach of confidence — and not under any criminal provision. Victims must currently rely on civil remedies: injunctions and damages under breach of confidence, and in appropriate cases a constitutional motion. The absence of a dedicated criminal offence is a significant gap in T&T law. Several other jurisdictions, including England and Wales, have enacted specific criminal offences for this conduct. Readers who have been affected by non-consensual intimate image sharing should seek urgent legal advice on the civil remedies currently available.
Written by Martin George, Attorney-at-Law. Martin George is the founder and principal attorney of Martin George & Company, with more than 35 years of active legal practice in the courts of Trinidad and Tobago. He is a former Commissioner on the Law Reform Commission of Trinidad and Tobago and a member of the Prime Minister's Constitutional Committee for Internal Self-Government for Tobago. This article is published for general information and public legal education. It does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your specific situation, contact Martin George & Company.
Last reviewed: April 2026