Justice Chris Blackman (l) Chief Justice Designate Marston Gibson (r)
Many believed the opening of the Judiciary Centre would have provided the perfect opportunity for Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart to announce the overdue appointment of Marston Gibson as Chief Justice of Barbados. Barbadians must conclude by the non-announcement that the roadblock which Gibson confronts in his current job which prevents him from resigning is taking longer to overcome than all would prefer. The Marston Gibson vigil therefore continues.
Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart at the opening complimented the palatial edifice at Whitepark which now houses the Courts, Court Registry and Community Legal Services however he hinted we needed to improve how justice is being delivered. A snippet from Prime Minister Stuart’s address provided an insight to his unease when he referenced the length of time individuals are held on remand. One could speculate that by complimenting retired Chief Justice among others for making the Judicial Centre a reality, his criticism of the justice system in the same breath was a chiding of Simmons’ stewardship.
Our justice system limps along despite the recent public plaudit from Sir Dennis Byron the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Barbadians should sit up and show concern on what is a grave matter concerning our inefficient court system. The administration of justice is critical to maintaining a stable Barbados. No effort or money should be spared to protect the judicature. A breach in confidence by the populace of our Courts will deteriorate to anarchy. If such were to occur it would remove one of the more visible and desirable characteristics which Barbados has earned through the years.
To add to the woes of the legal fraternity, we read about Justice Chris Blackman who sits on the Bahamas Court of Appeal “named as the first respondent in the action filed in the name of the trustees of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and The Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU). The Registrar of The Court of Appeal is listed as the second respondent in the writ filed this week.” Justice Chris Blackman, a Barbadian “is being accused of bias and conflict of interest in a writ filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of two unions that sought to block the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC).” – see report.
The old people have a saying, when it rains it pours.
David, are you sure that they still want Gibson? I am hearing otherwise.
In the Chris Blackman matter it seems ill judgment he would not have recused himself. C&W was a client when he was at Carington & Sealy.
Pingback: The Marston Gibson Vigil Continues, Barbadian Justice Chris Blackman Named In An Action In Bahamas | Barbados news
Governments silence on the Marston Gibson appointment to C.J is deafening. What is also deafening is the oppositions silence on this matter also. A change of an acy was rushed through parliament at minutes to midnight many months ago, one thought the gentleman was on a flight back home to take up the job. It now appears as if this government is begging this gentleman to take an appointment he’s not really interested in fulfilling.
I FIND THS INTERESTING. SINCE MOST GOVERNMENTS IN THE THIRD WORLD WHEN THEY INTEND TO FIDDLE WITH AN ORGANISATION AND FIND SOME ONE WHO AGREES WITH THEIR EVIL OR GOOD VIEWS(INVARIABLE EVIL VIEWS) DELAYS THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PERSON HOLDING THE FORT. IT TAKES VIGILANT CITIZENS TO ENSURE THAT JUSTICE IS DONE. IF THE PERSON IS WORTHY HIS HIRE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORKS. OH THAT THEY WERE MORE LIKE YOU IN THE REGION.
I am extremely offended to see Justice Sherman Moore standing is, as it were, for the chief justice at the opening of the Courts. Justice Moore has in the recent past managed to display total incompetence as a judge, far less as acting chief justice. He has also displayed lamentable lack of discretion in explaining the decision of another judge to two lawyers as being because the judge and the winning counsel in the case were related. Shame on Justice Moore – he doesn’t deserve to be on the bench.
One would have hoped that the PM would take the opportunity granted by the opening of the courts to announce the appointment of Mr Gibson. His failure to do so merely signals more of the same garbage that has been foisted on people in the guise of justice.
As for Chris Blackman, another one of the Simmons-appointed incompetents on the bench.
Meanwhile as all the rubbish goes on, Barbados’ off-shore sector is moribund, because overseas investors are finding other places for their money that DO have a viable and working judicial system.
@David
I am missing something from this article. The non-appointment of the Chief Justice has no relevance to the the mention of Chistopher Blackman in the the article. In a word, the two bear no relevance.
The non-appointment of a Chief Justice should not prevent the current acting Chief Justice from reviewing the court system and making reccomendations for the improvement of justice and implementig what systems that he thinks fit that will impove the dispensation of justice.
Perhaps it is time for a review of the sytems. Did you think that an erection of a building would have lead to improved efficiency. If you carry the said bad habits over to the new building what do you exspect? To date i have never had a cause to look at the legislation dealing with the dispensation of justice. What I believe, is, that there should be something in law stipulating the time a decision should be delivered if it is not there. if it is there then it should be enforced. Justice delayed is justice denied.
The Prime Minister in lthe news mentioned missing files. Every Document in the court system should be in hardcopy and should be mircorfilmed. Hope that we have not built such an expensive building and still have an antiquated approach to managing files.
Shermon Moore should have balls to make the necessary changes for the smooth running of the Judiciary that what he baing paid to do and if he acts for three years in that position he is entitled to full pension.
I have had an opportunity to visit a number of persons in the new building and its a lovely building but what?:
If we cant deal with simple matters, how can we deal with complex ones? 18 months ago I wrote a complaint against two three police officers and to date nary a word on the matter. I am just biding my time.
@ just only asking. Good points, except:
There is no problem with mentioning the Chris Blackman issue along with the lack of appointment of a Chief Justice. They are both tied together by the fact that the bench is incompetent and nothing appears to get done to sort this out.
Justices Moore and Blackman are both appointees of the BLP to the bench. So the BLP/Simmons rot continues and you are correct in that opening a new building to house the organs of justice will not cause justice to be rendered.
I have a suggestion based on certain factors. 1. Queens Council are deputy judges. 2. A court can be constituted anywhere. 3. There is a serious backlog of cases that are heard in chambers and not in open court.
Therefore, might it not make sense to ask QCs to hear the odd case in which they do not have a conflict of interest in the conference rooms that most of them have in their own chambers? This would significantly reduce the backlog, freeing members of the bench to hear those matters that have to heard in open court. It would also significantly reduce the volume of appeals, as the cases heard by Queens Council would, in most instances, be decided by legal authorities whose knowledge of law and experience is far greater than that of the bench. Pay the Queens Council for hearing each case and you would almost certainly find that money would be saved. More importantly, decisions would be forthcoming far sooner and the guidelines of 90 days for the delivery of judgements would be met.
Yes, there is a 90 day limit, but it is, as Shakespeare put it, “more honoured in the breach than the observance.” In fact, it is SO honoured in the breach that the observance is an exception, rather than a rule. This is disgraceful. Justice is thereby not only denied, but mocked – by the bench.
@Amused
I agree with your reasoning. However i would have to disagree with you on the point about QC. Within the last 16 years i witnessed some people becoming Queens Council and wondered what they did to deserve such a designation, having not seen or heard of them doing outstanding work in the legal area,
To be honsest, i was neve impressed with Chistopher Blackman when he was on the local bench. But then again, in the Caribean society, people believe that tehy can use their positional power to influence decisions. Gone are the days when people are prepared to accept what is dished out to them.
In america, judges are sanctioned for delaying cases, what prevent the sanctioning of judges and magistrates in this jurisdiction. Is the 90 days enshrined in any legislation or is it just in guidelines?.
So what is the problem now with the appointment? It was suggested that his pension was holding him back. Is there another problem or the same one still. Even if the pm announce the appointment at the end of year with potential for it to be brought up would be a better case. As is we kept in perpetual state of waiting with the current acting CJ there “until further notice.” Will we end up going into an election with an acting CJ?
On another blog BU suggested the current political climate is tailor made for opposition politics, why is Arthur and crew so silent on the matter? The usually strident President of the BBA Mr. Pilgrim is also mysteriously silent. A conspiracy of silence maybe? Has the brotherhood called this matter to order?
With all the discussion and anticipation of the appointment of a new Chief Justice, I don’t see how the Acting Chief Justice can be criticised for not exercising his presumed power in making any needed changes to the Judiciary, when such changes will be likely ignored until there is a substantive Chief Justice in place. I was also surprised that the Prime Minister did not use the occasion to discuss the current situation regarding the Chief Justice position. Indeed his criticisms of the legal system (length of time on remand etc), can seemingly only be remedied by having a Chief Justice in place to lead on, effect, and enforce those changes. One wonders if there is such a dearth of suitable candidates for the post of Chief Justice that all the stops have to be pulled out to select one particular candidate, and if he/she is unavailable then a Great Search for another has to ensue.
Why is it the PM and the AG do not realise that the public deserves to be spoken to on the matter? The PM’s of speaking when he has ‘something’ to say contradicts all the tenets of building a good rapport with the people, good governance too.
Amused, I should point out to you that the title is Queen’s COUNSEL not COUNCIL. I suppose you may blame it on a typo even though you did it at least three times. Are you really familiar with law? QC’s are deputy judges? Where?
How can you say they are silent david. they had articles earlier this month question why there is no cj still. Pilgrim chastise them in his address on the matter. They may only attack so frequently because at the heart of the matter most bajans do not feel that a new cj will solve the justice problem they will just continue on. As such it is not ” crowd gathering issue”. If it prolongs onto the election it be easy matter to add to what they will term indecisiveness of the government. The economy/cost of living/health/education/corruption/supposide corruption are the issue everyone really cares about now and they get the most time in discussions/press. Just last wee
For once, Spratt, you are correct. It is indeed Queens Counsel. Happy?
Are you sure, Amused? You are always right in these matters. Now can you refer me to a provision which makes QCs deputy judges?
@Jack Spratt
What have you been hearing?
@just only asking. I cannot disagree with your statement about QCs being dished out to many undeserving lawyers. However, the courts are in crisis and extraordinary measures need to be taken. Can you honestly say that QCs have been given to any lawyers less competent than the majority (the vast majority) of those currently on the Bench? Court time is taken up with many things, like appeals from taxation of costs by the Registrar and I fail to see why these and other chambers matters could not be assigned to these deputy judges. Then there are matters for security for costs on appeals that could certainly be handled by these deputy judges. All this would significantly speed the delivery of justice. In complicated matters of civil law that are to be heard in chambers, these could be assigned to QCs who truly are the top of the profession and the benefits of that would, in most cases, be decisions that defy meritorious appeal and are rendered swiftly. The solution is there and all it needs is to be implemented. If we do not take desperate measures, the devastation of our off-shore investment sector will continue to the ultimate demise of our economy. I am not over-stating the desperation of the situation at all, you know.
I am convinced that for many on BU it will require the return of Jesus for them to believe/accept the obvious.
@Just only asking
Juxtaposing the Blackman issue is to illustrate the position of influence of a judge. While not imputing biase by Blackman his past relationship with C&W should have forced a recusal
David, I am hearing that the powers-that-be were not that impressed with the interview Gibson did with Tony Best and are now looking for an opt-out card. Personally, I don’t believe this, but there is certainly room for speculation, in the absence of explanation.
It is clear that Lawyers are not hurting financially from the malaise in the system.
I also do not understand how one man can be expected to dramatically correct the problems with the Justice system in Barbados.
The solutions to most of the problems are administrative.
Modern document management is critical. Ever went to a Lawyers office and watch his secretary trying to find a file?
Ever went to the Registry and see the 1950’s era file storage system.
A new CJ will take years to effect change in the system.
The Lawyers in duh bimbenz cars, an Fort sin sandy ridge mansions don’t have to care cause de delays ent affecting dem cash flow.
@Hants
The change must begin some where right? Somebody must lead it.
@anthony
Is it not passing strange we listen to people shouting all day on the talk shows about this that and the other especially stuff made of politics but something as important as improving our judicature we are happy with a couple articles in the press and a few utterances?
Stakeholders must see this as important and stage an effective lobby.
Barbados we are truly a passive lot.
In a related matter the question is being asked elsewhere:
“Is their any truth to the a note sent to me that no drug dogs to help in detection of drugs and firearms are at the Seaport? Can you ask this on your blog?”
Why would they want to do that Hantsie?
@Anthony
we are spending too much time talking about the appointment. What we need to do is insist that Justice Shermon Moore porduce for being paid so handsomely, until the matter of the appoinment is resolved.
The appointment is jsut a red herring..
@just only asking | June 25, 2011 at 11:26 AM. Although I deeply regret to say it, you have abundant grounds for your view. I sincerely pray you are wrong.
David wrote “Somebody must lead it.”
How about a few of the Lawyers in Barbados including the ones posting on BU showing some strength of character and coming up with a plan to effect meaningful change and a stated objective to support the next CJ?
How about the millionaire Lawyers in their midst, who have benefited from the “system”, giving back to the system by improving the management of their own practice and offering to help fix the problems with the Judicial system in Barbados.
Sort of giving back to the community.
@David
While I understand your rational, I believe they shoudl have bee two different head lines as one really relates to the appointment of a CJ and the implicit assumption that the CJ will solve all the ills in the court sytem by lifting a magic wand.
The article on Christopher Blackman simply put deals with his failure to have declared that he would have had a material interest in the matter, having served as a partner of Carrinton and Sealy, a client of the said law prastice..
But you and I will agree to disagree from time to time..
@Anthony
What about Health Care that you are concerned about. State you point of view dont just hide behind a one line statement.
@Amused
There is an administrative manager at the courts, i am told, and she should ensure that a proper filing sytem is in place and request the requisite technoly, if not there to enhance the filing system. I spelt Counsel wrong, so dont mind the blogger that is a salt herring. I always follow your reasoning, sometimes we make some slip ups too, but i look for the messge.
David asks “Why would they want to do that Hantsie?”
Simple. A modern efficient system would increase cash flow and the profits made by Lawyers.
Imagine a system where Estates can be settled in less than a year instead of 5 to 10 years. Lawyers collect their fee on completion.
Negotiated divorce settlements in 6 months. Lawyers get paid right away.
Only crooked Lawyers would support a system that allows them to have client’s money in their posession for years.
Its all about the money,benzbimmers and mansions David.
Thanks Hants!
@Hants
You are bang on. i could remember buying a piece of land cash, at the time the int rate was real high, the lawyer kept the money in the clients’ account and he got interest on that. When he fled the county and i got all my documents from the ag chambers, that is how i know why they slow down the process so that they can keep the maoney and make interest. That is what Andrew Pilgrim should be dealing with. Those corrked lawyers.
.
I bought a lillte old house a few years ago and the transaction was settled in less than three months. Lawyers should be required to return the interest they earn on clients’ money.
@Hansie(Thats david’s name for you)
You are bang on. i could remember buying a piece of land cash, at the time the int rate was real high, the lawyer kept the money in the clients’ account and he got interest on that. When he fled the county and i got all my documents from the ag chambers, that is how i know why they slow down the process so that they can keep the maoney and make interest. That is what Andrew Pilgrim should be dealing with. Those corrked lawyers.
.
I bought a lillte old house a few years ago and the transaction was settled in less than three months. Lawyers should be required to return the interest they earn on clients’ money.
@David
Why when the blog immediately before yours have the same tag, for example i tried responding to Hanse and it said duplicate.
Sorry David
It went through even though it had said dupilcate, that why the change in the tag.
@ just only asking | June 25, 2011 at 3:49 PM.
Have to tell you that the systems ARE there at the Registry, but seem not to be used. I have to put that down to a number of reasons. Lack of training. Lack of effort. Etc. These days, you can file online and the systems for scanning are in place. Therefore files ought not to EVER go missing. If hard copies DO go missing, there ought to be electronic backups. Barbados has spent millions upon millions of dollars ensuring that the technology is in place and expensed law practices for te same. There is no excuse whatsoever for files being lost and the frequency with which files continue to be lost is truly alarming. Cases are set down, counsel is in court and so is the judge and witnesses are standing by, having incurred the cost of loss of income and the expense of getting there – and then everyone is told to go home, because the file is lost. It happens all the time. Then, you wait for months (sometimes years) until another court date is set, by which time you hope and pray that the file has been found. But if it has not, you get a repeat. Then, if the file has been found and the case commenced, likely the judge adjourns the matter part-heard and sine die and you have to wait months (and OFTEN years) until hearing is continued. Finally, the matter is heard and you wait in expectation for a date within the 90 days, for a decision. 90 days comes and goes and clients badger their counsel to find out when they can expect their decision. Counsel speaks to the judge and finally in desperation writes the CJ. And there is nothing done. By this time a year has passed and no decision. Counsel explains to the client variously that the judge is on assizes, the judge is on study leave, the judge is on a convention and, most popular of all, the judge is on holiday. A year becomes a year and a half, becomes two years, becomes three years and, in many cases, becomes five years. Then you hear that the judge has retired, but will give a decision soon – and “soon” becomes another year or two. You soon have to ask yourself what will happen if the judge dies. Are you going to have to go through the whole process again? Yes, you are.
However, if the judge does not die and does, many years later, render a decision (including from retirement) what happens then? Is it over? Not necessarily…..the Court of Appeal. To which you may well find that the judge has been elevated. You have the comfort of knowing, however, that that judge cannot sit on the panel to hear the appeal and you take comfort in that in the hopes that more competent judges will hear the case and render a timely decision. Dream on. As there is an appeal, there is likely to be a hearing for security for costs whereby the party that lost will be required to post bond or cash with the courts in an amount to be decided by a justice of appeal for the costs of the winning party at first instance, if the appeal is lost. So you wait again until the matter of security for costs is decided and the bond or cash paid into court. You pray that the amount ordered is not paid within the time limit, because then the appeal is dismissed and matter done. If it is paid, then you go through the same process of waiting for a date for the appeal, having it heard and then for a decision to be given. But there is yet another appeal process – the CCJ. And so it goes on.
I said that the matter is done if the security for costs is not paid. However, not necessarily. We then get to the matter of costs that can be agreed or taxed. If agreed, you are home and free. More likely, however, they will have to be taxed. This will involve a hearing before the Registrar who will decide what costs are due to the winning side. But the other side may disagree with the Registrar. And do you know what happens then? You are back in court again – FOR YEARS!
Eventually, it will come to an end, by which time you will be old or dead and the justice guaranteed to you by the Constitution and by all our law-makers (those people who suddenly become very friendly with us all at election time) will have been comprehensively denied.
Most overseas investors indulge in a little thing called “due diligence”. Which means that they look at all aspects of the country in which they propose to invest, including the laws of that country and the effective application of those laws through the courts and no amount of political posturing is going to obscure the fact that in Barbados the Justice System is dead. No amount of talk about reforming the criminal justice system is going to divert the attention of overseas investors from what matters to them. Their pockets – which, coincidentally, also happens to be our national pocket.
The result? Our economy will suffer (is suffering) to an extent that our leaders are certainly not going to tell us, until they have, yet again, to come to us and tax us more to pay for the billions of dollars shortfall in overseas investments to be laid squarely at the door of our dear departed justice system.
Yes, folks. It IS that serious. So, when are we going to get a CJ who, with the full support of the Government (whichever government) will be empowered to bring justice back to us? No one of our elected servants seems to want to let us know. And we, sheep-like, talk of this matter in political terms, trying to score political points for our parties of choice, instead of taking a national view that the rot was started in the Justice System under the BLP and seems to owe its perpetuation to the DLP. So, when is our government going to have balls to do whatever it takes to deliver back to us a justice system that works and delivers justice? I give up!!!!!
@Amused
That is very educational. I am happy that i did not get accept to pursue law, the impatients person that i am would probably been charged for contemp of court.
At school my headteacher always used to say to me that i am going to end up in the court yard with the berries hitting me in my head and that was because, i never allow any one to push rubbish down my throat. It was stated that Barrow said that the court is not for poor people and i now agree.
I hope that we will get some serious movement in the system, I have a prolem with pepole in goverement drawing a salary month after month and producing nothing and thsoe are the person that reach the top, becasue they are yes madam and yes sir graciators. Leaders in the public service must lead and not follow their followers..
Here is what the Nation has to say about the functioning of our high court. This is despite concerns raised by stakeholders:
@just only asking
As for acting CJ. He can’t implement any drastic change since he their at until notice which can be given at any time. To bring the law court up to level we need there need to be drastic changes.
As for health. The cut in drug service duties might be the first in the list to get budget balanced. That will be need for rating agencies to keep up at the same level or upgrade the rating.
@anthony
You got it wrong, he has the power and authrity to operate in his capcaity of CJ even though he is acting.
I DONT UNDERSTAND YOU SECONG POINT.
He may have the power and yes if he put some things in order it can make the world of difference. What is need is major overhaul of the justice system. That is something he just can’t do. Imagine you been put on notice by your boss that you job may be up at any given day. Would you then be looking to buy a house/ or making major change in your department ? You wouldn’t as such he place in such a position. If they gave him a fix term of a year he may be able to accomplish some goal he has, but as he it there until notice he won’t trouble the running of the courts. While saying that he can pass down rulling such that all cases should be heard in certain amount of time/ judgement present within certain amount of time. for exception they muss apply to the cj and it will given on a case by case basis. that he can do and should do but probably never do since he himself might be guilty of the same thing.
on the second point it it to do with balance the budget and keeping the rating agencies happy. They don’t like excessive current account deficients neither does the IMF. They lead to massive increases in debt before capital projects are even considered. So it possible that the cut in drug service operation is only the first step in budget trimming measures to get the budget back healthy
@anthony
Got your drift, but he can still make changes if he wants to, but from what i gather he is not a mover or a shaker and perhaps that is why he was not given the job in the first place. The govt need to hurry up and decide what it is going to do..
That they do but no one likes to speak one this issue. I also quite shock also clico has not submitted a defence against the lawsuit parris has filed on it. If he get paid out and the policy holders are left receiving cents on their dollars invested the poll won’t be too kind to current government when elections do come around.
@anthony
This a matter where premium legal advice would have been sought.
It is up to the group of concerned clico policyholders to distill this matter for policyholders.
@Checkit-out
This is a conversation David had on facebook last night.
It will be a long road, ideally a forensic audit is required but a DLP government will never sanction it unless pressured.
I am of the opinion that our laws are flawed regarding people bringing in drugs concealed inside their anatomy. Here it is, an eighteen tear old girl passing out 36 packages of cannabis along with another 416 in her suitcase as she arrived from Jamaica. How come the two newspapers didn’t carry any report? Was this lady connected to someone with clout in the newspaper” Is she the daughter of some bigup family. The same weekend a 33 year old Guyanese came in with 11 pounds of cannabis. Both were charged, only Barbados Today carried the story along with twice on VOB’s news. Are we sweeping the behaviour of these drug mules under the carpet?
If it was some poor person from the Orleans or the Pine, the newspaper would have carried a picture of the person, his place of abode, where he work and carry a follow-up story if he get send to Dodds and if he out on bail. Tell me Why the secrecy?
David re, your post of June 26, 2011 at 8:03 PM;
I don’t think premium legal advice was necessary in this case. All it required was in-house, priveleged advice and the recognition that there would be no push back from the regulatory authorities, such as they are, No more. The CLICO policyhoders committee has a long hard road ahead but they need to fight with all the ammunition they’ve got and not hold back.
I taught a group of 40,000 voter would be pressure enough david. I guess they need to get the ball rolling on getting one done.
@anthony
Not all of the 40 thousand were affected negatively.
Most of them are still waiting on their returns david. So we use the that number for now unless you have more accurate figure ?
@anthony
What % of the 40 thousand policyholders do not have cash surrender value?
I am not surprised by the news that CLICO did not file a defence in the Parris’ case. As a matter of fact I predicted it. Parris will get his default judgement, probably from the money that Government lent to Public Workers Credit Union to buy Clico Mortgage Finance Company. You must look to see if there are other unreported law suits filed by other Clico executives. They will get full payments, and the policy holders will be lucky if they get cents on the dollar.
Caswell, there is a man (I assume) called HAMILTON HILL, who has poured scorn on me, and has characterized me and my strictures against the CLICO debacle as: “LAUGHABLE”
He has suggested I give up, because I am getting no traction, and maybe I should try BICO.
I hope he reads your comment above ….. it should tickle him and he will get yet another opportunity to LAUGH!
I am no legal eagle, but I was expecting a defense from CLICO’s Judicial Managers, who now manage, and are supposedly functioning in the interest of the company, also having declared that part of their mission would be to rebuild the company, if that were possible.
Are they just going to let the man who helped mismanage and plunder the company get away with obtaining what seems to be, an entirely undeserved bonus of TEN MILLION DOLLARS?
Don’t they at least believe that a forensic audit would render PARRIS’s claims null and void.
In view of the placement of the Judicial Managers, should Garth Patterson, retain his place as attorney for CLICO? Should not the JM’s appoint their own attorney?
I understand that Patterson parted ways with the THOMPSON LAW FIRM sometime ago, but if he has retained the CLICO business, it would seem that that pervasive protective THOMPSON SPIRIT as it relates to CLICO, has remained with Garth Patterson’s law firm.
Whoever then is in charge of the legal representation, isn’t that entity required to explain to the policy holders the failure to file a defense?
@david. What good are the cash surrender values if you can’t get cash fpr them when you they are either surrendered or matured.
@anthony
The point being made is there is a number of policyholders of the 40 thousand whose policies have not accrued surrender value i.e. less than 2-3 years therefore financial claim would be negligible.
Truthman; Good points in your 2:34 pm post.
Perhaps Amused or Jack Spratt or anyone of our legal posters could comment on the practicality, legality or otherwise of the Judicial manager taking the action you have proposed or were they appointed too late to be in a position to take such action. If they were indeed appointed too late it suggests either a voluntary or involuntary dropping of the ball by the Ministry of Finance.
So many missteps!
Just a quick opinion, David, since I am not fully briefed. Is the company sued the identical one under judicial management?
@Spratt
Need to research it but suspect he is suing the holding company.
It seems the Nation created unnecessary discussion because it filed an incomplete story.
Safe in law’s arms
2011-06-27
no legal action against CLICO while under judicial management
Its placement under judicial management has given troubled insurance company CLICO International Life Insurance Limited a temporary reprieve from legal action.
This means that a $10 million claim by Leroy Parris, former Executive Chairman of the company’s parent CLICO Holdings (Barbados) Limited, will not proceed unless the court says so.
This was disclosed this evening by judicial managers Deloitte Consulting Ltd, represented by Oliver Jordan and Patrick Toppin, following a front-page newspaper article yesterday on the issue.
Deloitte explained said that “in accordance with the Insurance Act and pursuant to the Court Order of April 29, 2011, all legal actions against CIL are stayed and can only proceed with the approval of the court”.
“This would therefore include the previous claim by Parris against CIL,” it noted.
“Since our firm’s appointment on April 13, 2011 as Judicial Manager of CIL we have had no notice of any new legal actions being commenced by Parris or any other person(s),” Jordan and Toppin added.
The managers said there were “several errors contained in the front page article” regarding the legal claim by Parris, including that CLICO Holdings was the company under judicial management.
“The facts are … CLICO Holdings (Barbados) is not under Judicial Management. Its subsidiary, CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd. was placed under Judicial Management effective April 13, 2011. Based on a further application by the Judicial Manager, the High Court approved an amended order on April 29, 2011 to clarify and issue clear directions,” the Deloitte representatives said.
“In January 2011, an attorney-at-law on behalf of Leroy Parris initiated action against CLICO Holdings for unpaid bonuses and other contractual obligations.
“In January 2011, Parris’ attorney-at-law also initiated action against CIL for repayment of amounts claimed for matured and surrendered policies held by Parris and his immediate family,” they added.
They said the newspaper report was therefore “erroneous and gives the wrong impression as it relates to the insurance company which is currently under judicial management”. (SC)
@Caswell
Am i missing something in you argument. If the mortgage com
pany was sold before he filed his his claim, would there be a future relationship between the company and clico? If not how can his claim be settled from the money govt loaned to the credit union to purchase the mortgage company?
jujst only asking;
Following on from your question above I would like to know also:- When the Credit Union took over the Mortgage Company did it only take over the assets and not the debts? Would the debts only become real debts when a legal claim is made or would such a big loan necessarily have to be on the books? Would the money loaned by NIS, as facilitated by Government, be expected to be used to cover both assets and debts as carefully assessed for the sale? Would the timing of the sale of the mortgage company be of any significant relevance to when Mr. Parris filed his claim? Was Mr. Parris’ claim made of the mortgage company or another CLICO company?
Oops! I meant “big debt” not “big loan” in my post above (line 5)
David; re. your post above about the Barbados Today story. My reading of that news item suggests that Mr. Parris is probably home free re. his 10 million dollar claim on CLICO HOLDINGS. The company under judicial management is CIL and that company is the one that cannot be sued, not CLICO holdings. Therefore the claim that will not go ahead at this time is for the insurance policies held by Parris and his family members only. Not the big 10 million dollar claim on CLICO holdings.
It is quite possible that I am wrong, but the Barbados Today article seems to be saying what I am interpreting above. Grateful for Amused or Jack Spratt’s input.
If my interpretation of the BT story is correct it might suggest that the monies paid through the Credit Union for CIL might indeed end up in the CLICO holdings coffers. As that company is not in Judicial management could the scenario painted by Franklin be within the realms of possibility, i.e. that the money that will pay off Parris’ claims on CLICO holdings could almost directly have come from NIS, as facilitated by Government?
There is a possibility that this is not so. But if it is, what is the message being sent to the concerned policy holders? especially since it seems unlikely that they will be able to recoup their investments.
Could someone refresh my memory on Why was’nt the various CLICO Holding company in Barbados put under judicial management?
Oops again!! Delete “various” in my last post above
Thanks, has left to read.