Tales From the Courts – The Idiocy of Chief Justice Marston Gibson XXV

Marston Gibson, Chief Justice of Barbados Designate

Marston Gibson, Chief Justice

The CJ seems intent to blunder from one piece of stupidity to another. Recently, he welcomed a group of pre-teen children to the courts and gave them a lecture on Magna Carta which, this year, is 800 years old. The thrust of Magna Carta […]was to protect the freedoms and human rights of the people of England, or the majority of them anyway. Whether it was successful or not is not relevant to this report. What IS relevant, in terms of the UK, is that Magna Carta forms the bedrock of the UK’s “flexible” and unwritten constitution and has been adopted worldwide, even in the USA.

In 1652, many of the clauses of Magna Carta were adopted by Barbados’ Treaty of Oistins. Considering that by that time, well over 75% of the population of Barbados were slaves, it has to be asked exactly what freedoms and human rights were being protected? Or was it just a political tactic at a time when Barbados was being impacted by the English Civil War? Seems that even back in 1652, the political class in Barbados was thriving and passing laws to protect their own agenda and not to protect the good of the population. And so it is today, even in the judiciary where the CJ, who appears not to have realised that he is not in the USA any longer where judges are elected, seeks political allies to shore up his crumbling position for which he is willing to disregard constitutional and human rights.

The CJ now enjoys, personally, a substantial backlog of cases awaiting his decision for years. And, as we know, the High Court enjoys a record backlog of over 3,500 cases and growing daily, which, in far too many cases, date back over 20 years. So, in his lecture to pre-teen children, no doubt the CJ skipped over (or obscured or simply failed to mention) Section 40 of Magna Carta which translates roughly “(40) To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.” This is a principle also enshrined in the Barbados Constitution breach of which constitutes a breach also of human rights. But what the hell. Why should the man entrusted with the justice system of Barbados allay his political and social ambitions to attend to and redress breaches of human rights? After all, he might have to miss out on a cocktail party or a trip overseas to somewhere like China, just to address pesky little concerns such as constitutional and human rights.

In his pursuit of political allies, the CJ has formed an alliance with the Bar Association, hoping thereby to enlist the support of the BA, itself a fatally flawed organisation, to ensure the continuation of the CJ’s own brand of total and catastrophic incompetence. BU has received a copy of an e-mail sent by the CJ on 11 July 2014 from Trinidad to that decaffeinated journalist Mr Sanka Price, the text of which goes as follows:

“I would be grateful if you would publish the contents of this email unedited so that my response will be read by the public of Barbados in the same way as it was able to read the article published in yesterday’s Sunday Sun.   It has been my policy, in the spirit of Alternate Dispute Resolution (“ADR”), to avoid disputes if there is another way to resolve them by private meetings. But there are times when that policy must yield to a public explication of positions I have taken. As we “speak”, I am presently in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad attending a Caribbean Heads of Judiciary meeting about locating money for justice improvement given the present economic crisis. However, I received calls at my hotel regarding the article and felt that an urgent response was necessary.  At the outset, let me express my deep disappointment at the article. The newly elected Bar President, Mr. Tariq Khan, and the Bar Council were voted into office on 30 June 2014. A week later, Mr. Khan requested a meeting with me and I readily agreed to have the meeting on 23 July 2014. In addition, I indicated to him that we would schedule a meeting of the Judicial Council for early September 2014 since I neither wished to meet in the August vacation nor to meet at a time when judges were of on vacation leave in July. I am, therefore, not sure what the publication of the article accomplishes when we have not yet met and the date is but 10 days away.  But since we are in the public arena, let me say now what my wish list is for that meeting on 23 July. First, I want to find out what is the Bar’s plan to tackle the growing instances of attorney dishonesty. The twitter in Barbados is that there are several attorneys who are in the same position as the attorney whose case is presently pending before the Court of Appeal. The problem is that the Disciplinary committee of the Bar, under the indefatigable leadership of Mrs. Marguerite Woodstock-Riley QC, has been unable to get its head above the staggering backlog under which it labours. Yes, the Disciplinary Committee has a huge backlog of complaints against lawyers! Doubtless, several of the those complaints will be found meritless, but several require investigation. This is an issue which the Bar has not dealt with, at least not publicly, and the Disciplinary Committee needs help. Too many Barbadians view attorneys as belonging to some sort of secret organisation which protects itself even when its members commit defalcations against clients accounts. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Disciplinary Committee meets in the Supreme Court building every Tuesday and works until late in the evening. The suggestion which I plan to make on an interim basis is for volunteer lawyers to assist the Committee with its work but a long term solution is desperately needed if the Bar is not to lose out in the crisis of trust which presently exists. The Disciplinary Rules require that complainants complete an affidavit but we may need to consider the possibility of permitting “whistleblower” complaints by lawyers against lawyers on a confidential basis. Even I have heard of lawyers who owe hundreds of thousands of dollars and who are being permitted to repay the money piecemeal, without any formal complaint being filed with the Committee. This is intolerable and cannot be permitted to continue.

Secondly, the issue has arisen where certain attorneys have refused to pay their annual Bar fees despite the clear language of the Legal Profession Act. I have recently sent a letter out to the Judges and Magistrates directing that such lawyers have no right of audience in the Courts. To their credit, the two Presidents of the Bar with whom I have worked have raised this as a major issue but until recently with the suggestion of Mr. Barry Gale QC, there has been no discussion of the appropriate remedy. This is another matter which I wish to have discussed at our 23 July meeting.

As to the other issues raised by the Bar, I say only two things. With regard to security, I have toiled over this one. I am aware that the lawyers are reluctant to be searched before entering the Supreme Court building but an incident occurred two years ago where an attorney walked into the Supreme Court building with knives. Now truth be told, the knives were to be used as evidence in a case, but the fact that he never voluntarily put the knives through the magnetometer, or even alerted the custodial staff remains a huge problem for us. Security is a major matter of concern and I can tell you that in some metropolitan countries, all persons entering court buildings, including lawyers, are subject to search. As to the parking, it continues to be a bugbear. I note only that when we occupied the old building at Coleridge Street, there was literally no parking, and we managed.

There are some other minor issues with which I will not trouble you or the public at this point. But let me serve notice that with the Court’s new website, the launch of which is impending, the Courts will be a lot less willing to be a “shrinking violet.” We will have a page where our positions will be made clear to the public. Until then, we will use this medium to set straight any records liable to be misunderstood.

I thank you for your kind consideration.

  I remain,

Yours very truly,

Marston C.D. Gibson,

Chief Justice of Barbados”

The outpourings of an egomaniac. And indeed the CJ did write the Registrar instructing her to send such a letter to all judges and magistrates instructing that all attorneys whose legal opinions, for reasons of VAT or based on the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of Sections 44 and 45 of the Legal Professions Act, refused to join the BA. And the Registrar responded requiring the CJ to point her to the law that gave her and him the authority to send such an instruction. It is BU’s understanding that no reply has been received from the CJ.

This year, Messrs Barry Gale (former BA chair) and Tariq Khan (present BA chair) decided to intervene in cases involving non-BA members, seeking to have judges deny audience. Barbados Today has reported extensively on two such cases. The first being that of Mr Vernon Smith QC and the other being Ms Vonda Pile. With the sole exception of the CJ, judges have refused the BA’s pleas to deny audience, but non-BA members have taken to ensuring that every time they appear in court, they have their practicing certificates with them for inspection by the judges. It is reported that Mr Khan has gone so far as to have one of his clients raise the issue in pleadings by way of affidavit. Mr Khan, who has right of audience in England and Wales, ought to know that if he did anything so improper there, he would be struck off. That the chair of the BA does such a thing certainly speaks volumes as to the state of the BA. And have no fear, BU can and will produce documentary back-up if it deems it necessary.

In the case of Mr Smith, the CJ refused audience, thus effectively disbarring Mr Smith from at least his court. Since the CJ was chairing a panel of three judges in the Court of Appeal, BU would be interested in hearing the views of the CJ’s fellow judges. After all, it seems strange that the CJ could make such a determination and enforce it, when it ought to require a majority. And the result is that Mr Smith has sued the CJ for, among other things, abuse of power. BU has been unable to obtain a copy of the pleadings in this case. After all, BU is an anonymous blog and we can hardly go to the Registry and obtain a copy of these public domain documents. If any of our legal eagles can oblige us, we would be grateful, even if it is merely the text and not PDF copies.

It is BU’s take that:

  • If the BA wishes to assert its position, it ought to do so by way of the courts and file a legal action against dissenting attorneys. BU understands that no such action has been filed and therefore the CJ has no authority to rule on such nor to take any position at all, until the matter has been decided by due court process.
  • On the matter of payment (or not) of VAT on BA dues, the BA acts, as do all organisations, as mere agents and has no rights to enforce payment of VAT. Such enforcement has to come from Inland Revenue Department which would need to file suit against these dissenting attorneys to enforce payment of VAT. However, that point appears to be moot, as Barbados Today has reported that the BA dues of Mr Michael Springer QC have been accepted by the BA without payment of VAT.

Most disturbing of all is the fact that, if the dissenting attorneys are right on either the VAT or constitutionality points, and these are matters for the courts, not the CJ who must now recuse himself from any dealings with these issues, to decide, then the fact that the Registrar send the Court Lists the BA only and the BA to its members only, may give rise to a serious civil action.

Some years back, as BU reported along with documentary back-up and minutes, Mr Wilfred Abrahams, then chair of the BA, held a meeting with the then CJ (Sir David Simmons) and the then Registrar and, most improperly, was advised by Simmons not to pursue the matter of dissenting attorneys. Even if improper, this was likely sage advice. Now, however, the BA, realizing the far lesser legal abilities and common sense of Marston Gibson, have, in the persons of Barry Gale and Tariq Khan, induced the CJ to step in and put his foot right into the hornets’ nest that is his own big mouth.

Prime Minister, this chief justice needs to go – as quickly and quietly as possible. He is a liability to the justice system and, worse, he is seriously detrimentally affecting our foreign investments and the well-being, constitutional and human rights of our citizens. And he has the nerve to lecture our youth on Magna Carta which, along with the Barbados Constitution, we doubt he has the ability to read and understand.

49 comments

  • Caswell Franklyn

    I endured much abuse after I wrote on BU suggesting that Marston Gibson was not qualified to be this country’s Chief Justice. After all, he was functioning in New York at a level that was roughly equivalent to that of senior legal assistant in Barbados. Legislation was introduced and passed in parliament to make him qualify. I still contend that the amendments were not crafted with enough precision to achieve the Government’s goal. Nonetheless, this lawless administration along with a compliant Bar Association ignored the law and allow the appointment.

    I keep telling people that there’s no wrong way to do a right thing. The appointment of Marston Gibson is a case on point and it has come back to bite the country in the behind.

    I am surprised that even after quoting the letter to Sanka Price, there was no mention of the fact that the CJ was referring to Therold Fields’ case while that matter was still before him. He went on to disbar Fields. Right or wrong, Fields was entitled to a fair hearing before the court. My opinion is that he did not receive justice at Sir Marston’s hands. To my mind a fair hearing is more important to our justice system than punishing Fields even if he had actually committed the act.

    Some are saying that Sir Marston should go; I am saying that he should never have come.

    Like

  • Y’all talking bout ‘Sir of the Cocktail Circuit’ right? ahahaha

    Like

  • @Caswell

    Please STOP rubbing the dark stuff in our faces. After an acceptable period Gibson presides over a judiciary which has not improved.

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    Okay, David. But this country needs to get rid of this man and the people who installed him. They are bad for Barbados and we keep tipping around that issue. We can’t wait until 2018. Time is ripe for civil disobedience lest we perish.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Like

  • BU notes about three weeks ago an article appeared in the Nation newspaper of disgraced Ernest Jackman matter. To date it has not appeared online. Accident or design we do not know.

    Like

  • @ Caswell
    Time is ripe for civil disobedience lest we perish
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    …..so how come time is not ripe to BUP….!?

    Like

  • “Magna Carta is important to us because it is the seed from which all of our rights and liberties that we now take for granted flow.”

    “All these rights we now take for granted began on a fateful day, the 15th of June, 1215, on the banks of the River Thames, when a monarch actually ceded some of his power to persons who were not of royal blood, but who said ‘we do not any longer wish to live in a society where we have no say, and where we have no rights’,” the Chief Justice pointed out.

    I was appalled to see Marston Gibson brainwashing students of my alma mater with the above foolishness of the Magna Carta.Why not simply tell the children the truth it has nothing to do with them or their ancestors when that document was born.We were not here.Tell them about the rights they enjoyed in our homeland,in our communities as men and women.In between some sweet drinks and corn curls with this garbage shoved down their throat ,wonder the children behaving stupid as shite.ADHD my ass!!!

    A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.

    Marcus Garvey

    Like

  • @Casewell and David. I was one who supported the appointment of Gibson. I was completely wrong and have said so MANY times. Time to move on.

    I agree completely with Casewell on the matter of Therold Fields. Whether Mr Fields was deserving of being struck off or not, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Gibson’s letter to Sanka Price shows clear prejudice and pre-judgement on Gibson’s part, as the matter was before him at the time. That, in my view, is tantamount to misconduct and is grounds not only for appeal by Fields, but for the PM to advise the GG to remove Gibson. I must also agree with Casewell and by now and beyond a reasonable doubt it is clear that in elevating Gibson to the office of CJ, the powers that be have given us a legal assistant where a legal giant is needed.

    Do you know that Gibson, in chairing an appeal court panel in a company law matter, actually stated on the record in open court that he knows nothing about company law? What an ass.

    Most concerning of all is the fact that this legal assistant had previously actually been hired by law faculties in Barbados and Trinidad to lecture to law students. And this explains the level (or lack thereof) of students qualifying these days.

    Like

  • Good thing then that Ms Mottley didn’t go to any of those faculties as claimed.
    But back to you Mr Amused , Can’t let you off the hook yet; why then with such an analytical mind did you offer Mr Gibson such unequivocal support in the face of such indisputable evidence from Bro Franklin and others?

    Like

  • @ balance
    ….because you never know from whence change can really come.
    There are many precedences of major system change coming from completely unqualified outsiders who bring needed fundamental change PRECISELY because they are unlikely candidates. People like Bill Gates for example…

    NONE of the local applicants deserved to be considered if change was intended. However, after three months, when it was CLEAR that the man was nothing but a clerk looking to socialise with the local upper classes, his ass should have been sent back to NY…

    That is why there are probationary periods for important positions.

    Look back and see that Bushie called the man out as a fraud within six months …based on his clear inability to establish himself as a leader.

    EVERYONE deserves a fair chance to PERFORM, whether we like them or not….
    Left to Caswell, NO ONE is good enough for ANYTHING to do with national leadership and responsibility….not even himself…

    Caswell happens to be right in this particular case, but human beings are strange.
    HOWEVER, once it is clear that they are NON-PERFORMERS, then they should EXPECT to be moved out of the way of progress…..meritocracy for ever.

    The failure here then is AGAIN the joker called Froon, ..Gibson’s esteemed school-mate, who probably considers the CJ to be a non-leper, and therefore worthy of his support no matter what….

    THAT is what is killing this island….

    Like

  • @Balance. Bushy has answered you for me.

    @Bushy. Many thanks, my brother

    Like

  • are-we-there-yet

    Bushie;

    Again, you’ve nailed the root source of all our problems when you said, above;

    The failure here then is AGAIN the joker called Froon, ..Gibson’s esteemed school-mate, who probably considers the CJ to be a non-leper, and therefore worthy of his support no matter what…. THAT is what is killing this island….

    Like

  • Caswell Franklin wrote “Time is ripe for civil disobedience lest we perish.”

    I hope it would be limited to marching and talking shite. Any violence would result in poor black people heads getting crack while the rich white folks getting by a joint effort by sas, seal team and jtf.

    Why are the top lawyers in Barbados not calling ( collectively )for the removal of the Chief Justice? Is it because of a cost / benefit analysis?

    How about replacing Gibson with Judge Matthis? He cool and he got serious street cred. Judge Judy would have been even better cause she white an rich.

    What rationaale could be used to appoint an “American” judge to be chief justice of Barbados and why didn’t the top lawyers object to Gibson’s appointment ?

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    Hants

    Do you understand the meaning of the word, “civil”.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    Amused

    Sometimes, I don’t know how to believe what you assert on this blog. I am not calling you a liar but I find it difficult to believe that the CJ could be that silly to say in open court that he knows nothing about company law. At that point he should have announced that he was not feeling well and make an appointment to see Dr. Ermine Belle.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Like

  • The following is from

    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2012/11/30/sir-marston-and-sir-frank/

    Chief Justice Marston Gibson and noted economist Dr. Frank Alleyne have been knighted in this year’s National Independence Day Honours.

    The Chief Justice, who will now be known as Sir Marston, was given the island’s highest national award for his outstanding contribution to the legal profession in Barbados and at the international level, ………….

    The Knight of St. Andrew is given to persons for extraordinary and outstanding achievement and merit in service to Barbados or to humanity at large.

    Like

  • “Considering that by that time, well over 75% of the population of Barbados were slaves, it has to be asked exactly what freedoms and human rights were being protected? Or was it just a political tactic at a time when Barbados was being impacted by the English Civil War? Seems that even back in 1652, the political class in Barbados was thriving and passing laws to protect their own agenda and not to protect the good of the population. ”

    The Magna Carta is a piece of self-serving legislation created to protect and benefit british whites then, centuries before the self-serving scam that was slavery and still in place today to benefit Euro or North American whites, it was never created to benefit a black population, no wonder parliament is like a crime syndicate, they do not understand the ramifications of the scam that is the constitution, they only understand scams, crookery, bribery and fraud and freely use the magna carta type constitution to cover their crime syndicate.

    As far as I can remember Chief Gibson served as a magistrate on Long Island with his specialty being alternative dispute resolution, guaranteed he has been cast into a nest of vipers who have very little to no intentions of changing the scam that they themselves never created……………..sooooo, why does anyone expect anything different.

    Hants said:

    “Why are the top lawyers in Barbados not calling ( collectively )for the removal of the Chief Justice? Is it because of a cost / benefit analysis?”

    Hants…the top lawyers, most of whom run the scams in Barbados, most of whom sit in the parliament will certainly not rock the boat unless such boat stops serving their best interests……….it’s not like if they are concerned with the citizens getting justice or not, it’s all about them and their earth bound material life.

    I recently had a close look at some of the statutory instruments that govern local civil procedures in Barbados, what I can tell you is that nothing is cut and dried, unlike what I was exposed to in NY, it’s a lot of mumbo jumbo coupled with time consuming unnecessary time wasting verbiage, no wonder it seems like nothing ever gets done in Barbados through the court system and justice is never seemed to be served despite what the Chief Justice says, though I believe his heart may be in the right place, as long as something is not done about the nuisance laws being implemented and just a constant century to century copy of the british bullshit, it will always be more of the same.

    UNLESS

    If Fruendel is not bullshitting the public about switching Barbados to republic status where they will have free rein to end the british crap, but then they will have to start jailing the members of the crime syndicate made up of the lawyers, ministers, insurance executives, business people who practice greed and discrimination on the island freely, it would be a whole new ball game.

    Like

  • I ask, get rid of Justice Gibson and put who in his place?

    David Simmons was Chief Justice under the BLP crime syndicate regime and all he did was manipulate the laws and find self-serving ways to enrich himself and CGI insurance company while totally ignoring justice for the people, he had the supreme court as a whore house, bought and paid for by Peter Harris, I am still trying to find out why the re-insurance companies are not aware of that scam, it’s only lately that it was exposed about the doctors who lack integrity and are greedy enough to falsify medical reports of personal injury victims and present them to Supreme Court Judges so that the re-insurance money does not reach the victim but keep within the crime syndicate and their members.

    To date, I am still to find out or hear that Justice Gibson is taking bribes or selling the Supreme Court to the highest bidder under the DLP crime syndicate. I am sure like most of these tricked out pimp title holders Gibson is not perfect, but it would be interesting to know who else people have in mind to replace him, since all the bajan bound politicians, lawyers etc are lodge initiated scamsters and crooks.

    Like

  • At the time Marston was recruited from outside the inner ring there was recognition by some the government needed to make resources available to his office. We have to include the moribund ‘system’ as well.

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    The only resources that Marston Gibson needed were ability to do the job and guts. Those resources could not be provided by Government. And the passage of time has shown that he has neither.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Like

  • I well remember the haste to change the constitution to bring this man here. Those of us non lawyers were told to shut up, we did not know law.

    Some were partisan and kept their blinkers on because a bad CJ Simmons was the worst CJ ever. This man was to save the judiciary in Barbados. But we non lawyers could spot incompetency from way over in New York. So I am not surprised that the fairy tale has come to a crashing halt.

    I was at a cocktail party at which both the CJ and the AG were in attendance. Someone said, those two are good people but they do not know any law……they are useless! This was from someone who had to deal with them over a period of time.

    I cannot say that as a Barbadian that I was shocked or embarrassed as we all know this!

    Like

  • October 2011

    Barbados Chief Justice calls for “SENSE OF URGENCY” in Courts

    How is he doing so far?

    Like

  • What is the BA’s assessment of his performance so far?

    Like

  • “Amused June 22, 2015 at 8:26 AM #

    @Balance. Bushy has answered you for me.”

    Prefer to hear Bushie’s answer for you from you

    Like

  • Due Diligence June 22, 2015 at 11:43 AM #

    The Knight of St. Andrew is given to persons for extraordinary and outstanding achievement and merit in service to Barbados or to humanity at large
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Is that so? are Sir Charles, Sir David (Seale) and Sir Goddard all Knights of St Andrew. Or are they Knights of St Michael and St George.

    Like

  • We sit here in judgment of a man that inherited all the problems. And we in our high and mighty way, believe that he could have solved them in a few years. The problem is that Sir. Marston was not plucked from the so-called legal luminaries we have around here. Everybody knows that overhauling a justice system itself becomes a burdensome legal task. To blame and attack him for not cleaning up the mess of all his predecessors, is wrong. Like I said, it is just because he did not come from the higher echelons and social classes of our country that he has been so severely pilloried by those who will never be happy with such a person attaining such great heights. Sir Marston is not responsible for the mess he found. Try drinking a glass of milk. A spill if it occurs takes longer than it take to drink the milk.

    Like

  • should read: A spill if it occurs takes longer to clean up than it takes to drink the milk……

    Like

  • @William Skinner

    If we accept your view, and there is merit in the position a person must be given time to perform a difficult task, one still has to apply some measure for appraisal sake on an ongoing basis. If we take look at Gibson’s stint so far what successes has he had, what measures have been tabled to influence the system… You shouldn’t generalize, the backlog of cases increasing in the courts, the BBA doing as they like, etc. In his Manifesto he promised he would have wrestled this problem to the ground. Enough of promises we say!

    Like

  • @David. Apart from this constant pushing of ADR as if it is a universal panacea, Gibson has done nothing. Not even instituted a solid framework for his beloved ADR. I have been unable to locate a single decision that the CJ has personally authored, but would be interested to read any such decision.

    ADR is also not the solution Gibson purports it to be. I firmly believe that ADR can be very useful in family law matters, particularly divorce, where the far less formal process of ADR can often cool people down and promote reasonableness. However, parties are best advised to have counsel and in addition they have to pay the mediator’s fees, which are not cheap. And also far more time is often required to effect a solution. And if the mediation fails, then the matter goes to court and no part of the mediation process can be revealed to the court, so you cannot rely on helpful comments, excited utterances, one party or another may have inadvisably made during the ADR process. Also, ADR, to succeed, depends largely on the willingness to mediate by the parties themselves and bringing them to this point largely depends on the counselling of their attorneys. The quality of the mediator is also very important.

    Gibson seems to be trying to pass the buck from the courts on to ADR, at the potential expense of the parties that have no intention of settling by mediation anyway, in which case, determination of the case is further delayed. I say “seems” as I cannot come up with any other explanation. It is not solving the problems with the courts at all, merely undergoing a PR exercise to give the illusion of doing something. It also appears that Gibson is trying to provide himself an alibi. “No one would cooperate with me in solving the problems of the courts through ADR.” Pathetic little legal assistant.

    In any case, Barbados’ Civil Procedure Rules mandate certain pre-action protocols, as the CJ will certainly now be all too aware, as he must have been personally served with these by Mr Smith QC before he filed his action. Such pre-action protocol letters set out the cause of the complaint and the claims, in terms of money and terms, that it will take to settle before the action is filed. This can effectively open dialogue and negotiations between the parties at a stage where costs do not then have to be addressed by the courts. Indeed, that is one of the reasons for these protocols. Since I know that the action has been filed and served, I now need to ask the question whether or not the CJ responded by himself or through counsel to the protocol letter. If not, clearly the CJ is trying to establish rules and laws for all of us from which he personally feels that he is exempt. The word “hypocrite” springs to mind.

    Like

  • @ David
    What we are failing to accept is the fact that reforming the judiciary is in itself a delicate legal undertaking. The reason for the current back log of cases is the fact that there was a substantial back log in the first place. As for the BBA the same thing goes; the longstanding complaints and so on were allowed to drag on for decades. We live in a society steeped in procrastination-just look at the issues confronting: garbage collection and the PSVs. Identifying Gibson as the chief culprit, is just plain unfair. Even the new justice building is plagued with problems because of construction flaws. Can we honestly blame Gibson for that? Let us be fair. The good gentleman inherited many of the problems we are now airing. To have expected him or anybody else to come with a magic wand and clean up the system is just wishful thinking.
    Its the same thing we have with the economy. Arthur was running it for 15 straight years. He did nothing but cosmetic changes- never any real reform, now he is giving all kinds of fancy speeches, ideas and advice. Was he asleep all those years? Note, I agree that Sinckler is out to sea but what makes Arthur a genius now ?

    Like

  • The Chief Justice like Leroy Parris of CLICO was/is the Prime Minister’s friend.

    Why do we insist on looking for sophisticated reasons for his appointment.

    It was “who ya know”

    Plain and Simple

    Simon

    Like

  • @Consequences June 22, 2015 at 12:41 PM “I ask, get rid of Justice Gibson and put who in his place?”

    Justice Sandra Mason, a decent and hard working jurist.

    Wha’ happen?

    Wunna can’t bear to have a woman as Chief Justice?

    Stupseee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  • @William

    We can debate all day long how long is too long even when it is bad. We come back to the point, has the CJ been in office long enough for the public to feel there has been an ease in the delivery of justice. Bear in mind justice underpins how we govern.

    Like

  • @ David
    In my humble opinion there is no evidence that the dispensation of justice has suffered under Sir Marston, our current Chief Justice. What I have observed is a broader discussion of the judiciary since he entered office and that is always good for our democracy. We now have a chief justice who is engaged and has engaged the public. No longer is the office or office holder seen as untouchable. In my opinion that benefits all citizens.

    Like

  • Steupsss
    “A spill if it occurs takes longer to clean up than it takes to drink the milk……”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    True…
    But shiite man, if yuh DON’T know how to use a mop and you take a job as a clean-up maid ..does that mean you should be excused because you are a nice person who mixes well…?

    Are you happy that the ‘spill’ that occurred with your patent issue is taking so long to clean up?
    There is no justification in encouraging incompetence. NONE!!!
    Meritocracy for ever…

    Like

  • @William

    Sorry, don’t see the logic in your response. By the CJ’s admission the caseload has is mounting and he appears clueless how to arrest it. We can’t even get the court video project up and running.

    Like

  • http://bb.china-embassy.org/eng/sgxw/t1274810.htm

    Ambassador Wang Ke Met with the Chief Justice of Barbados

    2015/06/20

    On June 19th, H.E. Ms. Wang Ke, Chinese Ambassador to Barbados met with Hon. Sir Marston Gibson, the Chief Justice of Barbados. The two sides exchanged views on further deepening the legal cooperation between China and Barbados.

    Sir Marston happily reviewed his visit to China in May, thanked the Chinese side’s nice arrangement and hospitality, and anticipated to participate in the China-Latin America Legal Forum in September, 2016. Sir Marston also expressed that he would discuss with the Chief Justices of other Caribbean countries on establishing a China-Caribbean Legal forum to enhance the legal cooperation between China and Barbados, as well as the Caribbean Region.

    Ambassador Wang committed that the Chinese side was willing to strengthen the exchanges and collaborations in the area of law with Barbados and other Caribbean countries to facilitate the mutual understanding, learn from each other, and keep promoting the friendly cooperation with Barbados and the Caribbean Region.

    Like

  • OOPS

    I meant to ask if someone could explain to me how a “nice” visit to China will help to reduce the backlog.

    Like

  • What makes a Lawyer qualified to manage a business (court / legal system ) ?

    The problem of backlog of cases requires a team of competent managers with competent support staff..

    Like

  • @ Hants

    The problem of backlog of cases requires a team of competent managers with competent support staff..
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Brilliant…..don’t even bother about the staff, competent managers will have competent staff in short order….
    Shiite man, that Canadian cold licking the brass off your donkey….. 🙂

    Like

  • What? An insurance scam? With doctors falsifying reports? Anybody ever injured in this country knew that long ago! Some doctors even refuse to write the reports in the first place. They wait to see if you will die first so your family will have even more trouble pursuing the case.

    Like

  • Due Diligence June 24, 2015 at 9:31 AM #

    OOPS

    I meant to ask if someone could explain to me how a “nice” visit to China will help to reduce the backlog
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    China has perfected the art of reducing the backlog of condemn persons. One bullet in the back of the head.
    China now has the contract to refurbish the Gymnasium, perhaps after that is completed , they may be asked to refurbish and managed Dodds Prisons.

    Like

  • Bush Tea June 24, 2015 at 11:36 AM #

    Shiite man, that Canadian cold licking the brass off your donkey….. 🙂
    …………………………………………………………………………
    And so says many a BL& P employee. They called the Wind Maria ….and We call the cold Sarah.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences

    Well Well June 25, 2015 at 11:08 AM #
    I could swear Errol Niles was disbarred and re-instated, I never heard anything about being vindicated. He was disbarred and people, particularly his potential clients would need to know this information before making an informed decision on whether to hire him as a lawyer.

    Most lawyers in Barbados should be disbarred seeing that they have no problem with their fellow lawyers of the Order of Fraternity of Thieves stealing money and land/properties from the elderly, dead, dying etc who trust them to handle their affairs, these lawyers believe that scum like Therold Fields should not be disbarred but allowed to continue stealing from and lying to their clients…………very disturbing but somewhat not surprising, until clients get angry and they start finding them in pieces or not finding them at all, this travesty of lawyers in Barbados believing they are above the law will continue into infinity.

    For many years David Simmons and his partners in crime robbed the helpless who happened to have land, stole money from the vulnerable while he presided as the chief justice for many years, not one lawyer asked for his removal, because the most of them fed at the trough of greed and saw nothing wrong with the victimization of clients and still see nothing wrong with lawyers as thieves, something has to give. It’s an ugly thing when you do not and cannot even get a Prime Minister in Barbados with the integrity to stop his fellow lawyers and parliamentarians from stealing from clients………do these idiots believe anyone in the real world will take them seriously….ha!!

    So far it’s only been Bajans who have lived outside of Barbados who have been successful in exposing the crooked lawyers for the thieves that they are, there will come a time when nothing will stop the exposure, right now they are messing with a particular female tiger shark that will definitely destroy the whole nasty show, she has a NY flavor and does not take prisoners.

    I am yet to see Gibson do anything nearly criminal enough to warrant his removal, I believe he was committing crimes against the court and people of Barbados, not one lawyer would be seeking his removal. They are yet to bring any clear and concise reasons why he should be removed.

    BTW…..as I said previously the rules governing civil procedures are definitely not clear and concise or straight forward, I noticed that there would be a rule on page one for example that explains the procedure etc and on page 2 that same rule contracts the very same rule and procedure of page one…..totally useless, time consuming nonsense. They can never get it right if it’s self-contradictory, no wonder the lawyers interpret it to suit themselves and commit their self-serving crimes.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences

    I am also diligently waiting to see if like his predecessor David Simmons, the current CJ Gibson allows himself to be drawn into sitting on the board of directors of these thieving insurance companies in Barbados, which is a direct conflict of interest while sitting on the bench as CJ.

    Like

  • ”Hants June 24, 2015 at 11:05 AM # What makes a Lawyer qualified to manage a business (court / legal system ) ? The problem of backlog of cases requires a team of competent managers with competent support staff..”

    It depends on what is causing the backlog. Such simplistic ignorance written as a solution without understanding the cause of a backlog is itself symptomatic of the state of the nation.

    Any serious approach to an issue always starts with a full analysis.

    As someone suggested ages ago on these blogs, and something none of the legal people such as Amused took up, get a list of all the judges, which includes a list of total cases each heard and total cases each wrote judgments for and cases each has outstanding (do this for last fifty years) and that should give a clue as to the issue.

    But no, many would rather speculate with rubbish and innuendo.

    You want your answer, you now know where to look.

    Any other approach will lead you down the garden path of nonsense.

    Like

  • @ Mobert
    “……get a list of all the judges, which includes a list of total cases each heard and total cases each wrote judgments for and cases each has outstanding….”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Boss…
    This is the VERY first thing that ANY competent manager would do….and apparently the very last thing that any of the lawyers we know of seem interested in doing…

    You trying to reinforce Hants’ point or what…??!!

    Like

  • I would agree that the magna carta is the source of the rights of western societies. However, when viewed in its historical context the magna carta merely established rights for the aristocrats and not the society. It took the American revolution to extend those rights to certain citizens, and it took the revolt against slavery, to extend the rights some of us today call democracy. However, some us are still not free in this democratic society

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s