caswell

I don’t think you have the section 3 part d correct. it states

is qualified to practise as an attorney-at-law in
Barbados and has practised as such in Barbados,
in some part of the Commonwealth or in a common
law jurisdiction for a period of, or periods
amounting in the aggregate to not less than, 15 years.

so even if he did pratice in the us it would count but only on the correct interpreation of the act which you have it stated to mean English common law. They hadda go back and do more amending if they want gibson appointed

The internet is a font of information. Had Mr. Franklyn taken the trouble to look-up Common Law he would know that the United States, like Barbados, was once a colony of England and like Barbados adopted the Common Laws of England?

@ HG
It is also a ‘font’ of MISinformation.

i wouldn’t be surprised if the govt put its foot in its mouth again. they run the govt like a political campaign. just say and do anything hoping that it would go unchallenged and if challenged resort to demonising tactics. no reasoning. no effort to think things through. political fluff at every turn. hence alt of constitutional and administrative blunders in ministerial acting appointments since mr thompson was in and out of office but except for ezra alleyne liitle hue and cry from the fourth estate. sometime time ago in an interview on radio, mr lowe said he is fit and ready to return to his job and as far as he is concerned is still the minister of drainage.is he? deafening silence from the party. i have not done any checks to verify caswell’s assertion yet but i wouldn’t be surprised if he is correct.

@ruth arnetta. My contention from the first is that Chief Justice Gibson has held a license to practice law in Barbados for over 20 years. Thus, he is qualified for the post of Chief Justice WITHOUT any change in the law.

The law has changed and Chief Justice Gibson has not only held a license to practice law in Barbado for over 15 years (which means he is deemed to have practiced law), he has also practiced law in a common law jurisdiction for over 15 years. Under the law, therefore, he s doubly qualified and his tenure as a lecturer in law at UWI is therefore irrelevant.

I am advised that Chief Justice Gibson will be arriving within weeks to take up his post. The untenable posturings are over. There is no legal challenge, merited or meritless, to Chief Justice Gibson taking up his post and starting the uphill struggle to gave Barbados back the justice system of which it was deprived by persons and parties all of which we know.

Now, this is unlikely to satisfy you or to remove you from your rickety and laughable soap box. But hey, what the hell, this is a democracy and it is your constitutional right to be a fool if you wish – and it is OUR constitutional right to laugh at you if we so desire – and on this issue, I am laughing.

@HG

Dale Marshall made mention of the point you have raised. He indicated the US is better described as a hybrid of a civil and common las jurisdiction.

Noticed the Nation has given prominence to Caswell’s letter to the editor. This matter of the CJ’s appointment needs to be put to bed

@ruth

Perhaps you are correct because the discussing continues about the appointment of David Simmons. Although not illegal without a doubt an insensitive appointment of the worst kind.

Amused
Please read this slowly. You have completely missed the boat. I did not say that the US is not a common law jurisdiction. I said, for the purposes of the laws of Barbados, it is not. Our law clearly states that “common law” means the common law of England.
United States cases are not decided based on decisions of the English courts. The two systems separated in 1776.

Why would you think that someone formulated my case? Maybe it is because you judge me by your own yardstick, since you cannot think for yourself. Fortunately, right or wrong, I think for myself. Can you honestly say the same?

Mr. Gibson is reported to be a judicial referee. I also checked the internet. Judicial referee are not necessarily lawyers: depending on the complexity of a case the judge might appoint a referee to deal with technical areas that are outside the judge’s competence. For example in complex financial matters, a judicial referee could be an accountant. The referee would hear the case and advise the judge of his opinion. In cases like this the judicial referee cannot decide the case.
A judicial referee could be said to be practicing law for twenty years in much the same way as a policeman who goes to law school and qualify but continue to direct traffic for twenty years. Oh, by the way, I formulated that argument by myself.

Look, Franklyn, you argue how you like. I done with this subject. I am happy to wait and see if you are right, or me.

Amused man you can done just so.

You battin good good an now you runnin way from de sweet water duh bowlin bout hey?

Why are you giving this looser, joker, cant-keep-a-job, political grasshopper so much leaver-age?

Without Favour: Let the truth speak. “Common Law”

“The ancient law of England based upon societal customs and recognized and enforced by the judgments and decrees of the courts. The general body of statues and case law that governed England and the American colonies prior to the American Revolution.”

“The Common-law system prevails in England, The United States, and other countries colonized by England. It is distinct from the civil-law system, which predominates in Europe and in areas colonized by France and Spain. The common-law system is used in all the states of the United States except Louisiana, where French civil law combined with English Criminal Law to form a hybrid system. The common-law system is also used in Canada except in the Province of Quebec, where the French civil-law system prevails”

It is all over, based on “Law”.

@checkit-out. Go look at the interview that the Nation had with Marston Gibson the night vote on the Act was taken, just before the Act was taken. How would you interpret that? Seems to me that there IS only one interpretation. Please give us your thoughts, after you have read it.

Amused; I recall reading the interview and I would be totally with you if you had referred to changes hinted rather than unstated changes intimated. But my point is not a serious one.

@ruth

It was more than insensitive, it betrayed the tenet on which the independence is built, i.e. the appearance of separating the executive and judiciary

I wonder what it is about Gibson’s appointment that people would examine every jot and tittle to try to disqualify him. Perhaps “Amused” is correct and he will shake up the system.

@David

So the author is a former assistant to the former CJ? (Am raising a quizzical eyebrow here)

Hmmmmnnnn

@enuff

Wikepedia has shown to be sufficiently rigorous to support most arguments. BU is not an academic journal after all.

We see Marston appoint appointment not conflicting with the tenet of executive and judiciary separation, more about ensuring an eminently qualified Bajan is given the pathway to do a job.

And eff he is a Bajun looka e gine get deported after serving time and we gine havta deal wid him. Castrate de bugger!

@ David

It is not an academic journal, but BU’s mantra is transparency and good governance of which facts and sound decision-making are key elements. If the insertion of ‘common law’ still raises questions regarding whether or not the US is a common law jurisdiction then the decision is not sound, and Wikipedia ought not to be a source to defend what appears a complex argument. Moreover, Wikipedia is “shown to be sufficiently rigorous to support most arguments” BUT not ALL!!!

The separation of the judiciary and executive was the issue with the appointment of Simmons. The amendment of the law to appoint Mr. Gibson has also created a similar perception given the government’s willingness to accommodate him.

@man wif no name……update de man is a Jamaican phew tank god he aint nuh bajun. Dem gine deal wid him when he get home. Lawd wat dese west indians comming ta dese days en Hingland!
http://bajansunonline.com/accused-serial-rapist-takes-stand/

This is wonderful…really.

from Caribbean News>Prime Minister Kamla Persad Bissessar says her administration is in no rush to ditch the London-based Privy Council as Trinidad and Tobago’s final court even though regional countries have established the Port of Spain-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).>>

What a barrelful of laughs these Caribbean politicans are.

Caribbean community what?! What a nonsense. Cannot do a fishing agreement in four years, cannot agree on a common court of justice.

And people still think this is a community?

One definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Actions based on ‘ideology’ will get the desired result in a textbook, but implementation is another ballgame, as we are seeing.

Forty, almost fifty years ago, Jamaica and T&T told wunna to
‘sod off’ and they are doing it again.

Y’all get it …YET?

Caswell;

Check the various threads about the Marston Gibson affair and you will see that I brought up the matter of MG being merely a judicial referee or judge’s assistant in New York on at least 2 occasions. No one responded to that point. It seems that it is a no-no on both sides of the fence.

Am I correct in interpreting the slant you are giving the judicial referee thing is that MG is not qualified for the post of CJ here because, inter alia, he has not even been practising law for the last several years in NY and has merely been an assistant to a judge providing information to allow that judge to make legal rulings.

Perhaps he has been providing legal education to the Judge he reports to and is thereby qualified for the CJ position on that score.

Caswell and Checkit-out thanks to both of you.
Why would a Rhodes Scholar with a law degree and former law lecturer at Cave Hill settle for a job as a judge’s assistant for so many years?
Here is part of the job description for a judicial referee.
DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF WORK:
Court Attorney-Referees act as special referees and research and analyze complex legal issues and questions raised in civil and criminal cases heard in trial courts or on appeal to certain County Courts and may be responsible for supervision of court attorneys and support staff who are located in one or more courts situated throughout a county, judicial district, or department.
They serve in a confidential capacity and work with substantial independence from supervision in units located in the Court of Claims or special parts in the Supreme Court or in the County, District, Family, and Surrogate’s Courts in counties entirely within cities or in counties that have populations exceeding 400,000.
ASSIGNMENT:
The appointee’s assignment will be at the direction of the Administrative Judge and the Supervising Judge of Matrimonial and Family Courts for the 8th Judicial District. The duties will include assisting with matrimonial, family and other civil legal matters for the Supreme Court in the 8th Judicial District. Travel between several counties may be required. Candidates with practice and knowledge of Matrimonial and Family Court Laws are preferred.
GENERAL INFORMATION: The above statements are intended to describe the general nature and level of work being performed by persons assigned to this title.

Based on this job description should we take the chance and install a judicial referee be our Chief Justice?
If a company advertises for the Chief Financial officer should the company appoint someone who has a job description as a book keeper and holds an accounting degree?

Mr.Gibson will shortly take up the post of Chief Justice of Barbados.Let’s see if he will dispense justice without fear or favour.Let’s see if the mealy-mouth wayward unscrupulous opponents—lawyers and politicians—will work with him and not try to oppose and frustrate him at every turn.Let’s also see if he will become a member of the ole boys’ network and the status quo ante or if he has “true character”.Let’s see if he brings change…change we can believe in….

@lol

Why do you feel you should trivialize this man?

Have you not listened to many lawyers in Barbados admit Mr. Gibson lectured them at university?

Does a secretary have that capability?