Court of Appeal Upholds Ruling Against BTB

The Court of Appeal has delivered a decisive blow to the Belize Tourism Board (BTB). The court dismissed BTB’s appeal and upholding a ruling that found the statutory body wrongfully terminated Misty Michael, its former Director of Marketing and Industry Relations.

In a unanimous decision, the appellate panel affirmed that Michael’s dismissal in May 2021 was without cause and in breach of her fixed-term employment contract. BTB was ordered to pay Michael BZ$217,822.18 in damages, along with interest and legal costs.

Michael, who was appointed under a three-year contract beginning April 2020, was abruptly terminated just over a year later. The BTB cited Clause 7.1.3 of her contract, which allows for termination due to a “material change in circumstances” such as a financial crisis caused by external events like the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, the court found that the BTB failed to prove it was financially incapable of paying Michael. Evidence presented showed the organization had between BZ$10 to $12 million in cash reserves at the time and had even budgeted for her position in the 2021–2022 fiscal year.

The BTB’s appeal was based on nine grounds, including claims that Michael’s contract was invalid due to lack of formal ministerial and board approval, and that the compensation clause for early termination was an unenforceable penalty.

The Court of Appeal rejected these arguments, finding that the Minister’s verbal approval of the contract, while not recorded in writing, was legally sufficient under the Belize Tourism Board Act, the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the BTB had ostensible authority to execute the contract, and their actions bound the organization and that Clause 7.1.1, which entitled Michael to full compensation for the remainder of her contract if terminated without cause, was a valid and enforceable liquidated damages clause, not a penalty.

“The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent,” wrote Court President Madam Justice Minnet Hafiz Bertram in the judgment. Justices Peter I. Foster and Arif Bulkan concurred.