Submitted by Former Senator and Head of Unity Workers Union Caswell Franklyn
The Daily Nation of March 22, 2022 reported that Senator Gregory Nicholls, speaking from the Senate, claimed that the the legislation (Employment Rights Act) has no ability to compel the award made by the tribunal (Employment Rights Tribunal). I am certain that even though not intended, that statement coming from a renown lawyer, who claims to specialise in employment law, and from the floor of the Honourable the Senate would only serve to give aid and comfort to recalcitrant employers. Even if he were correct, and he is not, what was he thinking? Whose interest was he seeking to serve? Surely not workers that were unfairly dismissed.
Quite frankly, I am surprised by his ill-advised call, in light of the fact that section 47.(1) of the Employment Rights Act makes provision for the exact thing that he complains is lacking. It states:
(a) the tribunal makes an order or award in respect of the payment of a sum; and
(b) The Chairman or Deputy Chairman of the Tribunal certifies that the order or award has been so made, and specifies the terms of the order or award in the certificate,
the order or award is enforceable as if it were an order made by a magistrate’s court in civil proceedings.
I am not making this up. The legislation is there for Senator Nicholls and all other employment law specialist to see. I am aware that there have been attempts to enforce judgements of the employment rights tribunal in the magistrates’ court but those attempts have failed to get off the ground because there is no set procedure to guide the process.
It would have been more appropriate for Senator Nicholls to call on the Chief Justice to issue a practice direction to enable the magistrates’ court to deal with that section of the Employment Rights Act that the good senator claims to be non-existent. (Practice directions are merely procedures issued by the court setting out how matters would be dealt with).
See Nation Newspaper Article referenced:
Nicholls: Put bite in ERT law
NEW GOVERNMENT SENATOR Gregory Nicholls is calling for legislation governing the Employment Rights Tribunal (ERT) to be strengthened as it cannot compel employers to pay monetary awards.
Delivering his maiden speech in the Senate yesterday a few hours after being sworn in, Nicholls, a lawyer who specialises in employment law, said the COVID-19 pandemic had brought to the fore the weaknesses in the ERT.
“The tribunal to my mind needs to have some institutional teeth to enforce its judgement and awards, because we have employers, particularly those employers in the construction sector, that do not honour the awards of the Employment Rights Tribunal and there is no enforcement mechanism to enforce the awards made by the tribunal,” he said.
He said in a recent case the employer did not even show up.
“What Government should do, in my respectful submission, is discuss a framework where Government redresses that issue because employers feel that they don’t have to appear before the tribunal at all. They don’t have to file no documents, send no witnesses, make no submissions and when judgement is given, they
laugh and the legislation has no ability to compel the award made by the tribunal.”
He also charged that employers had taken advantage of the pandemic.
“Businesses have shed workers at an alarming rate and as economic activity has returned to the country, the employment is not coming back with the same rate in which it went. I believe the pandemic has shown that the resources that we allocate to the Employment Rights Tribunal are not as adequate as they should be.”
He added: “Within the context of what we have seen in the pandemic, certainly the tribunal does not have the capacity in a timely fashion to deal with all of the matters that are brought before it. I would like to see the Employment Rights Tribunal strengthen its capacity,” he said, adding the ERT should have its own “home”.
“We need to move to a stage where that tribunal is a full-time tribunal not necessarily functioning like a court but we must respect that in all respects it is a court,” he said.
Pointing out he was available to assist the Ministry of Labour and Government on how to rectify these anomalies, Nicholls suggested Government penalise the recalcitrant employers. (MB)
Like Caswell the blogmaster awaits Senator Nicholls’s statement of clarification.
For the record.. I am a big Caswell fan.
Will have to reread again, but there is not that much light between the position of Caswell and GN. Here I see GN as a practical man and Caswell as a theorist. They both reach the same conclusion though they arrive at it differently.
I consider myself as a realist who favors minimum talk and decisive action.
Developing a liking for GN.
If he continues to call it as he sees I and as it is, he will go far.
The question to ask is when will the government(s) get anything right.
the salary scale am seeing for them, there should be no more room for errors..
it’s seems that’s the major battle for the last half century, getting them to get things right especially when they started coming at ya with this world-class and first world spiel
can’t even focus on or be bothered with individual cock ups anymore, they are come at ya too fast and furious…by the time ya hear or see one, ya forget the previous 5 or 10 cock ups unless ya write them down…ah guess that’s the whole point…
i now see part of the problem where people remember very little to nothing……some are right to choose to forget..
Why is it that any and everything that comes out a govt ministers mouth it is presented in a cockeyed fashion
The question you should also ask is why Caswell has to be the one to pick up on these erroneous positions.
From what I read I gree with TheO
Where did the the lawyer claim the law wasnt there?
He Said it need muscles because of instnces that evolved during covid
It is very clear Caswell’s point which he clearly stated.
“ It would have been more appropriate for Senator Nicholls to call on the Chief Justice to issue a practice direction to enable the magistrates’ court to deal with that section of the Employment Rights Act that the good senator claims to be non-existent. (Practice directions are merely procedures issued by the court setting out how matters would be dealt with).”
The ERT was purposely designed to be the biggest joke tribunal ever and only benefits employers and lawyers. Everybody with any sense knows it denies justice by delaying it. Cases are extremely backed up and they have not seen fit to constitute it full time or have multiple tribunals to clear the backlog.
The Tribunal should be like a small claims court
1) Prohibit lawyers and other advocates from appearing before the tribunal
2) Only the employee, employer/HR representative and witnesses to appear in person or submit affidavits signed by lawyer or JP.
3) Only one tribunal hearing with decisions rendered within a few days.
4) Not appearing by either party will automatically render the decision against them.
Our system is tentacled by legalese and process. You suggestions appear good on paper but what about those who will appeal to CCJ at the instigation of lawyers?
In a related matter.
CA’s proposition presumes that Barbados is a normal country, where decisions are based on common sense, or at least on pursuit (even if misguided) of the common good.
Clearly, this is not the case.
Barbados has been ‘captured and occupied’ by lawyers and their sympathisers who have configured the whole society to facilitate THIER mostly materialistic and albino-centric aspirations.
So EVERY major operation is dominated by a lawyer, and this situation has persisted even in the face of abject incompetence and failure…. ANOTHER lawyer is just substituted to get the chance to fail all over again. (Did GH not have to resign from Transport Board just the other day?)
These people are so ’special’ that the LAWS constrain us to PAY them to (not) execute the most mundane of tasks, that any idiot can complete in a jiffy.
They are so, ‘bright’ (not) that Caswell can, and consistently has, outwitted, out-argued, and outdone them in the highest courts. ..and Caswell is not any Barbados scholar.
they are so BRAZEN, that on national radio just YESTERDAY, one argued that lawyers should NOT have their Clients Account audited because ‘there may be a young lawyer with only one client, who may not be able to afford Audit fees’
As Hants would ask ….What the Wrassole??!!!
Does ANYONE think they would pass up the opportunity to exploit the ERT to the MAX….?
The damn place is DOOMED… whether the blogmastrer likes it or not, (and whether he has ‘flesh’ in the game or not. LOL)
A spade is NOT a spoon…
Bushie calls a spade a spade.
It is obvious when the ERT was established it was to create a feather in the cap of Byer-Sukcoo who at the time was the blue eye girl and could do no wrong. The performance of the ERT from the getgo was compromised because of inadequate resources allocated.
“They are so, ‘bright’ (not) that Caswell can, and consistently has, outwitted, out-argued, and outdone them in the highest courts. ..and Caswell is not any Barbados scholar.”
That’s why Caswell can find himself on my sites any day of the week….NATURAL scholars with KEMETIC ancestry do not need papers from western degree mills…………that is not how it worked for our most brilliant scholastic ancestors…thousands of years ago…they created the VERY FIRST UNIVERSITIES….real ones…that is where all their works, publications, writings etc were destroyed and the rest stolen so long ago….and has turned into the gigantic SCREWUP that everything has become…
Clearly you are provoking the bushman.
What lack of resources what??!!
What resources does it take for three experienced, knowledgeable retirees (of which there are literally too many in brassbados) to sit down and listen to the various sides of what is usually some shiite story, and make a definitive ruling?
The ONLY reason there is a ‘problem’ is that Lawyers are involved, and their ONLY objective is to get theirhands on money in the millions. (probably to replenish clients accounts before any possible audit)
Ed Bushell, Elsworth Young and Maureen Hoyte would resolve 90% of those stupid cases in a month, for a few dollars, and would not even ask to be called ‘most honorable’.
You read what the blogmaster posted? We agree the performance of the ERT was compromised. We can debate if by accident or design. Some will debate it maybe for the same reason Estwick and Sinckler couldn’t see eye to eye when h (Estwick) was MoA with laughable resources given to agriculture.
😎🤣🤣👍@David, when yuh right I must give you yuh plaudits…. Sen Nicholls is indeed ‘wrong’ on the point the former Sen noted. 🤣Alas, although it does appear quite explicitly so the REALITY is that they are also speaking along different points as the lawyer is also bluntly saying that there is apparently no ‘redress’ GENERALLY for these matters.
He is reported to have said: ““The tribunal to my mind needs to have some institutional teeth to enforce its judgement and awards, because we have employers, particularly those employers in the construction sector, that do not honour the awards of the Employment Rights Tribunal and there is no enforcement mechanism to enforce the awards made by the tribunal”
The former senator countered and quoted the Act as when: “the tribunal makes an order or award in respect of the payment of a sum; […] the order or award is enforceable as if it were an order made by a magistrate’s court in civil proceedings.”
Clearly the latter refutes the first part of former re the impact of a court ruling… that’s institutional teeth!
However, Franklyn’s counter does not truly speak to the fact that our courts have shown a lack luster record to actually be an effective “ENFORCEMENT mechanism …”
Based on the massive issues faced by the contractor Barrack to get his monies (lack of enforcement) YEARS after a successful litigation against the Bajan govt there is a clear suggestion that although the Act may actually have the means about which Nicholls laments that neither that tribunal or the courts have true enforcement power or will or whatever to ENFORCE the mechanism for judgements.
THAT lack of enforcement appears to be the big problem … and note how the lawyer was reported as so casually (and boldly) offering his ‘expertise’ for hire to help fix that – maybe a new super-powered bailiff and debt collection service! What a lovely pappy-show, all around!
Do you opine the same as it relates to SOEs submitting information to permit timely audited reports for example and many other financial breaches uncovered by the AG and other regulatory bodies? The point is that for too long our system of governance has been reluctant to hold most people and organizations accountable, hence the lawlessness that has become a norm in the society. What we now get from the Barbados Courts and supporting agencies like BBA and Disciplinary Committee is surprise.
they are so BRAZEN, that on national radio just YESTERDAY, one argued that lawyers should NOT have their Clients Account audited because ‘there may be a young lawyer with only one client, who may not be able to afford Audit fees
De lawyer’s calendar was off, he thought it was April 1st.
It was an embarrassment to sensible Barbadians to listen to excuses proffered on the show yesterday.
For those who missed the less than stellar performance of the legal team yesterday on the talk show.
Good luck.on that
Mia busy building parks and planting trees
No.mention of wanting to have any increase for the govt workers millions planted in trees and plant
Ask the Canadian Bajans how long it takes to get your money after the closing date of a real estate sale.
I should have written ” in Canada “
Walter Blackman is hosting today and his opening is about NIS fund.
@Hants, in a few days.
They all love the pappyshow so they can complain about it for years and years on end…while doing nothing to change it, otherwise, what else would they have to talk, talk, talk and post about…..steupppss…
it was not more evident until my case was concluded, then the REAL THEM came out….and boy did they show up themselves for everyone to see…..sadly, no one was surprised.
@David March 31, 2022 6:30 AM
The next step for those people who disagree with the tribunal should be the Appeals court where the normal court process would follow. However, it should be an automatic triple or quadruple the tribunal’s original judgment + interest + both lawyer fees if the tribunal’s decision stands.
@Bush Tea March 31, 2022 8:39 AM
I fell out my chair when I heard that. Audits fees for that young lawyer with one client and few transactions would be faster and much lower cost than a lawyer with hundreds.
Auditing every lawyer’s books is a waste. The way it should work is complaints filed about unpaid funds to the Bar Association or law court should trigger an immediate full audit of the lawyer’s entire books.
We don’t need petty paragraph-counting here, as the former senator is pretending. The leader’s will alone is the law. The law is what corresponds to the leader’s will.
I listened on the 30th and the talk made me sick.
If honest lawyers were on the panel, then all they were doing was making excuses for dishonest lawyers.
Then folks were calling in and providing solutions as if this was a new problem.
I think auditing is ‘a joke’. For a honest lawyers, you can audit 200 times and the money is there. For a dishonest lawyer, by the time you audit, the money is gone.
The solution is to separate the lawyer’s fees and the client’s money as far and as quickly as possible.
To cover unexpected costs a reasonable percentage of the client’s fund can be held in an escrow account.
It should be obvious to all that these lawyers do not want solutions to what is a non lawyer’s problem. They do not have a problem. We, or rather, YOU who want to play sane and pretty, do!
An even easier solution is to pay all the money to the client and the lawyer can invoice the client for his fees.
Unfortunately our governments are top heavy with lawyers and will NEVER agree to your suggestion.
I have to say, they unnecessarily make it much more difficult than it ought to be, they all cover for each other in their tiefing sprees..
..my recent experience was straight forward, i got my check in MY NAME, clients should DEMANT IT, went to the bank got the lawyers their fees, immediately, and presto…end of story….
lawyers should not be holding client funds period, not at any time, no checks should ever be issued in their names, period, especially when it comes to land sales/ disputes, personal injury/civil etc..it’s way too easy for them to suddenly decide that the money is theirs and not the clients. …and start up a whole nightmare lasting years and years, never ending to cover their thievery..
Now this is how you deal with greedy merchants and price gouging….hit them where it hurts the most, shut them down until they get their act together….stop playing with these thieves…
.they pay the lowest salaries, boast about they make millions in profits every year and STILL PRICE GOUGE…
Not a peep ’bout the Appeal re the constitutionality of the Senate!!!
@John April 1, 2022 1:43 PM
Nobody cares about that except the lawyers involved who will be smiling all the way to the bank.
What happen to the 2 opposition seats the President is supposed to appoint? Give Caswell his seat back.
Making much sense many items.
However, as a lawyer would have a good idea of what his fees are
An even easier solution is to pay all the money to the client minus the lawyer fees. The lawyer can invoice the client for any outstanding balance.
Some clients are scoundrel and putting all of the money in their hands would just be moving the problem to the other side of the fence
However in the on going case with family lawyer named Lashley who allegedly stole afamily monies through a real estate deal
Lynch told the court he couldn’t remember anything as to what happen to the money
However not so funny the lLynch could state that during the period months and years he was unavailable to the family members his doctor recommended he should see a physchatrist to which he refused
Yet his law practiced remained opened to which he said employees continued to manage the office
Funny also that the clients said that when they visited the office and asked for lynch the employees told them they knew nothing about his where abouts
Ii makes for wonder how many hands were involved in the scam since he could have assumed several important privileges to them like documents assuming he was having sick challenges
The case resumes on Monday
Easy to calculate fees lawyers…..especially in personal injury cases, it can run from 5%-7.5% to 12%-15% for QCs, ya can do the calculation yaself and tell the lawyer what he or she is entitled to and there is a fees schedule for conveyances/land, divorces, this and that, for everything associated with law firms and fees.. etc….no lawyer should get away with overcharging in these times…not when ALL the information is available..
@TheOGazerts April 1, 2022 2:18 PM
It is in the lawyer’s interest to get paid upfront or put steps in place to get paid when the client’s cheque is ready if they have unscrupulous clients.
There are lawyers in Barbados already operating like how I suggested so I know it can work. I had a personal situation where the lawyer had his final fees already calculated and gave the split to the financial institution to cut two cheques, one for his full bill and one for me. All I had to do was a courtesy follow-up to make sure he got his cheque when I got mine.
I think the problem outside of true thievery is lawyers not properly keeping accounts and expense tracking logs so they might end up in a situation where they find themselves short from the poor accounting practises.
Building contractors dealing with multiple houses can easily find themselves in similar situations because of poor money management of large sums. Then they have to end up using your building materials and loan money to finish my house and hope he gets another contract so he can finish yours with someone else money.
@angela cox April 1, 2022 2:26 PM
You can’t blame the employees for following instructions to say he is not there. They have to follow the boss instructions or get fired.
It is up to them to find a new job and or keep their own records if they suspect something wrong is going on.
The closing arguments are on Monday
Would have been of interest to hear the employees side of how the office was managed during his absent and who was in charge of the business affairs of his clientele
Don’t expect to hear such revealed during closing arguments
However this case brought before a jury without hardened evidence to substantiate his claim of depression i
This might boil down to a case where the jury feels the pain of the client more that the pain of the lawyer
Unfortunately our governments are top heavy with lawyers and will NEVER agree to your suggestion.
Unfortunately our governments are top heavy with CROOKS and will NEVER agree to your suggestion.
“Protecting the image of the legal profession
If there were national rankings for the most important and worthy professions, attorneys-at-law would be right up in the top echelons. It is a career that requires years of study and training, and those who reach the heights are well rewarded financially and generally admired by the community.
The Canadian Judicial Council describes the role of lawyers as simply to guide their clients though the judicial system. They act as advisors in legal disputes, work within corporations, governmental and non-governmental organisations, and others choose to focus on defending their clients’ interests in court in criminal and civil matters.
In addition to representing their clients in court, lawyers also offer advice to their clients, do legal research and draft legal documents.
It is still the dream of many young Barbadian boys and girls to become a lawyer. They feel that way not only due to the perceived financial gain, but because they want to defend the rights of those who have no voice, who require others to stand in the breach against abuse of power and to ensure fair treatment for all.
Despite their standing and importance to several aspects of our lives, the noble profession is still the subject of unflattering comments that often question their integrity.
And in recent times, several attorneys have found themselves on the wrong side of the law. Some have been convicted, disbarred, and some, unfortunately, have even been jailed.
During a recent call-in radio programme, an interesting perspective was offered by a member of the Barbados Bar Association, which has some credibility. She argued that many attorneys are brilliant at the law but are woeful in the management of their businesses.
The fact is that unless new attorneys can find a place in established law firms or corporate entity, they are forced to launch their own practices. There is no denying that Barbados is teeming with lawyers and competition is fierce. It is estimated that there are more than 1, 500 lawyers and the roll keeps growing each year.
In addition to hiring the services of a secretary, legal clerk, and possibly a messenger, they must have someone to take care of their accounting, while they do legal research, which is a natural part of the practice of law, maintain communication with clients, ensure they make enough to pay employees, rent, and other expenditure, and the list goes on.
Unfortunately, some attorneys find it difficult to manage all those responsibilities. And unless they are able to proficiently manage their law practices or can hire the resources to ensure such, they can find themselves dipping into their clients’ accounts when cash flow issues arise.
This is not an excuse for unethical behaviour, but it is a critical factor that exists that lawyers need to discuss more openly and frankly. Young lawyers should not be fooled into thinking that they are going to become wealthy overnight or even at all.
In 2020, prominent attorney Marguerite Woodstock Riley QC, who was called to the Bar in Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, and who was working on reform of disciplinary procedures for attorneys, argued that there were options which could be pursued to rebuild the name of the profession which has become sullied by some bad actors.
“The proposal is to take the funds out of the hands of lawyers.
Real estate transactions – withholding funds is clearly the area of most, if not all, of the cases of disbarment. There is a reasonable solution, and it is pursued in personal injury claims where the payee writes two cheques – one to the attorney and one to the client, so the attorney does not have the client’s funds.
“The reality is there should be no objection to not having those funds once your fees are secured or any expense that you had. Whatever complications that may arise . . . creative solutions should be considered.” Woodstock-Riley contended.
She was speaking at an IMPACT Justice virtual public lecture on disciplinary procedures for attorneys titled: Does One Bad Apple Spoil the Whole Bunch? Protecting Against That Bad Apple.
During that session, she knocked a long-held belief that it was young entrants to the legal profession who were finding themselves entangled in unethical and sometimes illegal practices. In fact, she cautioned that it was often “senior attorneys” with “substantial practices” as she questioned why they were in the position they found themselves in.
What we are absolutely sure about is that lawyers must be held to the highest standards. At the same time, it is in the interest of the profession and the clients that it serves, that there be continuous training in the management of their business. This is as essential for all attorneys as is their expertise in the law.
Source: Barbados Today”
JUDGE RULES LEGISLATION RESTRICTS FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION ENSHRINED IN CONSTITUTION
Stories by Kareem Smith
The right of prison officers to join trade unions in Barbados has been restored following a landmark High Court ruling that erased legislative amendments made 40 years ago.
Justice Cecil McCarthy, in a written judgement released on Friday, struck down as “unconstitutional” Sections 23 and 24 of the Prison Amendment Act of 1982.
He found that the “substantial intent” of the amendment act was to significantly restrict prison officers’ freedom of association enshrined in Section 21(1) of the Constitution.
The controversial legislation enacted under the former Prime Minister Tom Adams made it unlawful for prison officers to join, associate with or benefit financially from trade unions. It also prevented the Prison Officers’ Association from representing prison officers on matters relating to their conditions of service or their ability to bargain collectively.
“Since I have found the restrictive provisions to be unconstitutional I have concluded that on a ‘fair view of the whole matter’ that the legislature would be disinclined to enact what has survived,” said Justice McCarthy.
“I therefore hold that the invalid provisions of the Act are inserverable and I declare that the entire amendment act is unconstitutional, null and void,” he concluded in a judgment that has rendered the Prison Officers’ Association defunct.
The claimants in the matter, prison officers Paul Outram, Dave Best and former president of the Prison Officers’ Association Trevor Browne were represented by Attorney-at-Law Gregory Nicholls in the matter. The Attorney General, the defendant in the matter, was ordered to cover costs for the plaintiffs.
Browne in particular has faced tremendous scrutiny during his tenure, including a charge of inciting mutiny and sedition from which he was later acquitted.
General Secretary of the Unity Workers’ Union Caswell Franklyn has been defending the prison officers’ cause for decades. In recent years, the veteran trade unionist served as a consultant to the Prison Officers’ Association given that ordinary union membership had been forbidden by law.
Franklyn said prison officers are already reaching out to join his trade union, but he stressed that they are under no pressure to do so.
“That is their choice. I have opened the way for them and opened their eyes to see that they have those rights. If they choose to go elsewhere, that is a concern for them, but it was Caswell Franklyn and no one else who pushed this matter,” Franklyn told Barbados TODAY.
“I have been representing them for years as a consultant because that is the only way that I could have done it and if they come to me, I will continue to represent them. If they don’t, well, good for them.
“I can assure you some have already approached me and said that they are willing as soon as the decision is written,” he added.
Franklyn said over a decade ago, he had engaged former Prime Minister Freundel Stuart, who was the Attorney General at the time, to discuss amendments to the controversial act.
However, when Stuart was appointed Prime Minister in October 2010, the matter was apparently not been taken up by his successor.
As a result, the union leader approached a lawyer, intent to have the matter fully ventilated in court.
“You cannot take away a person’s constitutional right by ordinary legislation.
You have to amend the constitution. The prison officers were already members of the NUPW when that Act was passed in 1982 to stop them from associating and all back then I was saying it was wrong but it was only when I became a consultant to the prison officers that I started pushing it,” said Franklyn.
“Prison officers enjoyed trade union rights prior to 1982 and when they amended the Prison Act to provide for the Prison Officers’ Association that association just took away every right that they had. They couldn’t even bargain for their own salaries, they couldn’t use the association for disciplinary matters or anything.
It was just like a key club,” the union leader added.
Under the previous legislation, prison officers could be fined or lose their pensions and gratuities if they even signed onto the medical insurance plan of the NUPW. According to Franklyn, the law imposed restrictions akin to a form of modern-day slavery.
The UWU General Secretary lamented that members of the Barbados Police Service and the Barbados Fire Service are bound by similar provisions.
However, their prohibition from trade union membership was enacted prior to independence and is protected through a mechanism in the constitution called the Savings Law Clause.
“This has only unlocked the door for prison officers, the police and the fire service. The legislation that governs them, is pre 1966. That legislation is saved, even though it would be unconstitutional to pass now. People enjoy that kind of power, but I don’t see why police and fire officers don’t have similar rights,” said Franklyn. email@example.com”
5%-7.5% to 10%-15% for QCs
Lies, excuses, an apologist
“If there were national rankings for the most important and worthy professions, attorneys-at-law would be right up in the top echelons.”
“It is still the dream of many young Barbadian boys and girls to become a lawyer. They feel that way not only due to the perceived financial gain, but because they want to defend the rights of those who have no voice, who require others to stand in the breach against abuse of power and to ensure fair treatment for all.”
“During a recent call-in radio programme, an interesting perspective was offered by a member of the Barbados Bar Association, which has some credibility. She argued that many attorneys are brilliant at the law but are woeful in the management of their businesses.’
LAWYERS ON THE 2X3 ISLAND HAVE BEEN RUNNING A CRIMINAL RACKET FOR YEARS CREATING LAWS TO FLEECE THE PUBLIC.
FOR EXAMPLE I HAVE SETUP UP A LTD COMPANY IN THE UK FOR LESS THAN BD$200 WITHOUT A LAWYER BUT BY FILLING OUT APPLICATION PAPERWORK AND PAYING A FEE OF 55 POUNDS.
IMAGINE COMING TO THE 2X3 ISLAND AND BEING TOLD COMPULSORY TO HAVING A LAWYER AND HAVING TO PAY THE LAWYER BD$1500, INCORPORATION BD$750 AND NAME SEARCH BD$100 A TOTAL OF BD$2350 WHEN COMPARED TO BD$200 IN THE UK.
MY SURPRISE WENT FURTHER SAME APPLICATION WAS COPIED FROM THE UK AND USED BY THE 2X3 ISLAND.
IN THE USA IN MOST STAATES CAN INCORPORATE FOR lESS THAN BD$300 WITH NO LAWYER.
THE ISLAND ARE FULL OF NOTHING BUT BRASSBOWLS WHO ALLOW CROOKS TO CONTINUE TO FLEECE THEM UNDER THE DISGUISE OF “BEING A LAWYER”.
Mario Puzo – “One lawyer with a briefcase can steal more than a hundred men with guns ”
There was a time a Bajan would tell you “if you cannot say anything good, then say nothing”. It appears that this good advice has been replaced by “if you cannot say anything nice then make excuses”.
We have reached the point where we must ask “What is Barbadian definition of an honest lawyer?” If you can go before a microphone and pretend that dishonest lawyers is a new problem or if you can explain away why lawyers are dishonest or if you can trot out old solutions this problem as if they are new, then you are a part of the problem.
For the past few days, I have been hearing honest lawyers commenting on the thievery of lawyers in Barbados. They would tell you it is a small number of dishonest lawyers, but if you are a client who draws the short straw and watch your reward for years of hard and painful work disappear down a lawyer’s pocket then you don’t care if it is two or 1100 hundred dishonest lawyers,
They apologists on the radio will tell you of the idealistic youngster who dreams of doing right and ignore years of abuse these same lawyers have heaped on their clients. They will tell you that law is a noble profession and ignore the ignoble cast of characters that lurk in our court system.
They will tell you of the expenses of a lawyer, of the need to hire a secretary, legal clerk, and possibly a messenger, and someone to take care of their accounting as if that justifies stealing a client’s money. If a lawyer cannot afford these expenses, then he should not incur them. Live within your means, grow from small to big and do not grow rich by stealing from your client need to be taught at Cave Hill.
Barbados appears to be one place where if people are not making the money they expect to make, then they can look for a handout from the government or push their hands in someone’s pocket,
It bothers me that, for years, every fool on BU knows that there is a problem, every fool on BU has provided a possible solution to the problem over the years (decades) and yet above we have ” “:In 2020, prominent attorney Marguerite Woodstock Riley QC, who was called to the Bar in Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, and who was working on reform of disciplinary procedures for attorneys, argued that there were options which could be pursued to rebuild the name of the profession which has become sullied by some bad actors.
“The proposal is to take the funds out of the hands of lawyers.
Real estate transactions – withholding funds is clearly the area of most, if not all, of the cases of disbarment. There is a reasonable solution, and it is pursued in personal injury claims where the payee writes two cheques – one to the attorney and one to the client, so the attorney does not have the client’s funds.”
Breaking news “In 2022, a man in St Lucy invented the wheel:” or like recently ‘In 2022, Barbadians discover digital banking”. Gimme a break
Please, a lawyer who covers for a dishonest lawyer should not be considered as honest. I would advise every lawyer in Barbados to stay off the air if they cannot be honest. I know it is not raining. Get off my leg and go find somewhere else to pee.
Please, a lawyer who covers for a dishonest lawyer should not be considered as honest. I would advise every lawyer in Barbados to stay off the air if they cannot be honest. I know it is not raining. Get off my leg and go find somewhere else to pee.
Lawyer says he suffered ‘breakdown’; denies stealing client’s money
Attorney-at-law Norman Leroy Lynch denies any theft of a client’s money although he does not know what happened to the funds on his clients’ account.
“I did not steal money belonging to the estate of Arthur Thomas. I cannot say what happened to my account or the monies on them,” the accused lawyer told the jury hearing the evidence in his theft and money laundering trial.
Lynch is accused of stealing $50 000 belonging to the estate of Arthur O’Neal Thomas between August 18, 2005 and December 21, 2008. He is also charged with stealing $407 634, the proceeds of a FirstCaribbean International Bank cheque made payable to Leroy Lynch and belonging to Thomas’ estate between June 22, 2007 and December 21, 2008.
Further, the lawyer is accused of money laundering in the disposal of $457 634, being the proceeds of crime, also between June 22, 2007 and December 21, 2008.
Addressing the jury on Thursday in the proceedings presided over by Justice Randall Worrell, the accused stated his profession and said he had never been in trouble with the law.
He explained that he practiced on his own from early 1980 “until I became ill and breakdown” sometime in March 2007.
I WONDER IF HE WAS HAVING A BREAKDOWN OR WUKKING UP WHEN STEALING CLIENT MONEY AND SPENDING NOW CLAIMING HE HAS NO MEMORY.
THIS FOOL IS GOING TO JAIL SOON.
Why clients cannot win
“After my . . . collapse I did not have sole conduct of my practice at times. I believe the staff managed matters in my absence.”
.The insinuation here is that staff stole the money. Earlier we were told that lawyers need the money to pay staff. Conclusion.. lawyer feeling sick.. you lose money.. lawyer in good health you lose your money.
Don’t just focus on big sums of money. These rats also steal pocket change. My mom was convinced it was not worth fighting a case because of the ‘small sum’ involved.
When a man steals your money in 2008 and you are still fighting a case with him in 2022, can you expect justice?
If a lawyer steals $1M and hire a second lawyer to represent him, is the second lawyer also a crook? Hell yeah.
I see it as money washing. The lawyer steals from you, then hire his crooked partner at $1M/hour. Case take 12 years and if you win, you hear the money was spent in lawyers funds.
The crooked judge then directs you to the compensation fund. You receive $100, a pat on the back and you are told “you proved the system works.
Stop the frigging games
Stop the charade
Guy steal your money in 2008 and you are still in court in 2022 then I have written a short speech for you. It will save you time and money spent on your lawyer
I will give you the short version
‘Judge, my lawyer, his/her lawyer, crooked lawyer and police, you can all kiss my ass’.
Reading kind of choppy. Suspect brain is still in sleep mode.
Theo…if you do not go at them COMMANDO style…they will eat you alive, then tell you it was YOUR FAULT…even if ya dying or dead….
i gave them 9 years to play the ass, then all bets were off…
I read recently (March 24) where one Ernest Jackman (lawyer) accused of theft between June 2006 and March 2007 had his case adjourned on the strength of a sick note, those things still work well in 2022. A cursory search of the Internet revealed that it had been postponed in Nov.2021 due to the restrictions around COVID. (An aside the Company that I retired from eliminated sick notes- if you were unwell, you phoned your boss and relayed the news to him/her and if you were off the job for 3 days they contacted someone from an outside agency who would work with you to get you back on the job).
For the people who were taken advantage of how do you make them whole again? What’s $678,000 in 2006 worth in today’s dollars? If found guilty are orders of compensation issued or does the injured party have to file a civil case? I believe these lawyers are playing for time i.e., “father time” will assist them in escaping judgement by letting nature take its course.
I observed that a Judge has been advising people found of gun crimes to “bring money” next time they attend Court, I am wondering if he will tell the lawyers in the Dock to bring a change of clothing.
@ Theo; @ Baje
What can we really say of lawyers, who know the taxpayers educated them free of costs and will then turn around and rob people without a conscience..
I was once in a small hired moke business back in the 80s. I had an account at the parts department of a major garage.
One morning, about six debt collectors came to the office to collect a debt of $173. and a few cents.
No problem , I was delinquent.
But, a lawyer or lawyers , can play loose/steal peoples’ monies , in the hundreds of thousands; refuse to pay settlements from insurance companies but can sit in our Parliament; become powerful national figures without a single debt collector coming near them.
There is a problem that has an easy solution but some lawyers will not give up the freedom to use clients money as loans,overdrafts and ATMs.
Even the honest ones do NOT SEEM TO care that they are thought to be a collective of thieves.
“Even the honest ones do NOT SEEM TO care that they are thought to be a collective of thieves.”
True, but those TWO probably don’t sleep well either.
22 years to get a child pedophile convicted and jailed, St. Lucia got a mere 166, 487 people..
22 years and these fools will look you in your face and tell you they are developed and this is progress….the animal only got arrested in 2018…..and the excuse i, there is no statute of limitations…
the Caribbean is a waste….then again, these are the same ones who claim they are ready to go fight for Ukraine……the education system in the Caribbean is a waste of taxpayer’s money..
This information has been going around for days….
“Situation Update, April 1, 2022 – Death of the dollar begins TODAY; the final chapter of a debt-based empire
1:05 Economic Insanity
30:00 Panic Mode”