No single profession attracts the ire of Barbadians like lawyers. On a daily basis For example, we often hear complaints about lawyers taking unreasonably long periods of time to transfer monies from clients accounts to their clients. The complaints come from Barbadians living overseas  who having entrusted life long savings (pensions) to lawyers to settle various transactions in absentia or Barbadians on the rock who have no choice but to take on the stress of the legal system to process routine transactions.

The Bar Association (BA) has done little to assuage the concerns by Barbadians that it is an efficient self regulating body.  Suggestions to include ordinary folks on the BA’s Disciplinary Committee has not met with a favourable response. There is a sense lawyers and by extension the legal system has the country in a vice grip headlock.    Where are ordinary citizens to turn for justice if the Court System, its trusted officers (lawyers) and the BA continue to NOT satisfactorily resolve concerns from citizenry?

BU accepts bad apples are to be found in all professions – doctors, engineers, construction class, bankers and the list is very long. However, what cannot be denied is the ‘omnipresence’ nature of the legal profession on our little society. What cannot be denies is the right of Barbadians to assign priority to issues affecting them as they think fit.  The time for citizens, ordinary and others, to fight back.

Take Note Commenters

  1. The objective of  BU LAWYERS in the NEWS page is to highlight reports of interest to the public about the activities of Barbados based lawyers.
  2. No Comments will be allowed.
  3. If you have information you think qualify email Barbados Underground by clicking on the following LINK.

We welcome your feedback.

322 responses to “LAWYERS in the NEWS”


  1. Another wtf moment involving the courts.

    Barbados law says ” a man could not rape another man.”

    https://www.nationnews.com/2021/11/10/ccj-decide-rape-issue/


  2. Court: No to judge’s recusal

    An application to have Justice of Appeal Rajendra Narine recuse himself from a leave to appeal hearing involving attorney Philip Nicholls has failed.
    Justice of Appeal Jefferson Cumberbatch delivered the unanimous decision in the Court of Appeal on Thursday after Nicholls’ attorney, Sir Elliott Mottley QC, argued that Justice of Appeal Narine should not be part of the panel because of perceived bias.
    The Court of Appeal had dismissed a recommendation by the Disciplinary Committee of the Barbados Bar Association, by a majority 2-1 decision, that Nicholls be disbarred back in July.
    The Disciplinary Committee had charged professional misconduct on Nicholls’ part in the matter involving Elma Inniss and Joyce Bowen, executrices in the estate of the late John Connor. It was reported that the committee made the recommendation after Nicholls was unable to account for $860 000, the proceeds of the 2008 sale of a property formerly owned by couple John and Hazel Connor.
    Retired Justice of Appeal Kaye Goodridge and Acting Justice of Appeal William Chandler had found that the report of the Bar Association to disbar Nicholls was not valid, but Justice of Appeal Narine dissented, saying that the report was not flawed.
    Lawyers for the executrices, Barry Gale QC, Laura Harvey-Read and Ivan Alert, filed an application for leave to go to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) to challenge the majority verdict. However, Sir Elliott objected to Justice of Appeal Narine being part of the panel to hear the substantive matter.
    Submissions considered
    On Thursday, Justice of Appeal Cumberbatch noted the court was seized of the in limine application by Sir Elliott and Kashka Mottley and had considered the relevant authorities and submissions of the respective parties.
    “We consider apart from an unfortunate and gratuitous comparison of the intended respondent with other attorneys earlier convicted of theft, we do not think that his overall judgement betrays a real possibility of bias in the circumstances,” he said.
    “Our judgment is that the application is dismissed,
    with the written judgment to be ready by December 29.”
    Following the decision, Justice of Appeal Narine said: “To my mind, I simply could not turn a blind eye to the contents of those minutes, which were before the court quite independent of the report . . . . The remark which I made with respect to attorneys being convicted of similar conduct or offences arising from similar conduct was unfortunate and gratuitous.
    “While this may be so, I do not wish to disagree with my learned brothers, but I simply wish to point out that it was merely a comment based on a disturbing trend which I perceive in the profession – that is the use of clients’ funds for personal purposes of the attorney.
    “I did not wish in any way to suggest that Mr Nicholls should be convicted for a like offence,” he added.
    Sir Elliott also served notice of his intention to challenge Gale’s locus standi – his right to bring the application before the court and before the CCJ.
    Appearing amicus curiae for the Barbados Bar Association was Rosalind Smith-Miller, Rita Evans for the Disciplinary Committee, and Kim Ramsay-Moore, amicus curiae on behalf of the Attorney General.
    The substantive matter, the application for leave to appeal, has been set for February 9 next year. (RA)

    Source: Nation


  3. You have to wonder where was is insight and influence when sitting in the Cabinet of Barbados for 8 years. All of a sudden he is a fountain of knowledge.

    Lashley’s call on pre-trial files
    by BARRY ALLEYNE
    barryalleyne@nationnews.com
    A CALL HAS been made for pre-trial disclosures in Barbados to be made available in a six-month timeframe to better facilitate the criminal justice system and protect people who are forced to face lengthy delays after being charged with serious crimes.
    The call has come from senior attorney, Michael Lashley, QC, in the wake of policeman Everton Gittens’ murder case being thrown out on Tuesday by Magistrate Kristie Cuffy-Sargeant in the No. 5A Supreme Court.
    The former government minister said there could be other people still on remand at Dodds Prison or even some on bail, whose cases could also be thrown out due to flimsy evidence.
    “The fact is that we have several accused charged with murder and very serious offences, however, when we are finally served pre-trial disclosure, there is hardly any evidence for a Prima Facie case to be made out. In some instances there is no evidence at all, but all this time the accused men are on remand for years pending trial and also out on bail waiting with their lives at a standstill, and even family lives affected,” Lashley told the DAILY NATION.
    His comments came 24 hours after Magistrate Cuffy-Sargeant dismissed the murder charge and two other counts of conduct endangering life the 50-year-old Gittens had been facing since 2015. The Drug Squad officer was charged with killing Selwyn “Blues” Knight and wounding his son Junior on March 15, 2015.
    The magistrate said prosecutors had failed to satisfy the threshold of producing evidence which could lead to a Prima Facie case against the accused man.
    According to Lashley, there are ways to prevent a recurrence of Gittens’ six-year wait for a legal determination.
    “We need an intervention by lawmakers that pre-trial disclosures be served within six months of an accused person being charged. The serving of disclosure within the six-month period would avoid delays and injustices,” Lashley claimed.
    The Queen’s Counsel added that case management was of paramount importance and would decide if there was merit in charging an individual, or determining if the evidence was so substantially weak that no magistrate or reasonable
    tribunal could convict the accused person.
    Efforts yesterday to reach the Attorney General to determine the Government’s next legal move, were unsuccessful.
    Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Alliston Seale, said his office would not comment on the matter. Another senior attorney, Andrew Pilgrim, QC, also declined to comment on the possible ramifications of the decision made to throw out the charges against Gittens.
    Lashley opined, however, that Gittens’ case could open the state to a possible civil lawsuit for malicious prosecution.
    “I must ask under what basis was this man charged. Was this man charged upon the same evidence which the magistrate dismissed as too weak to form a Prima Facie case?” Lashley asked.
    The attorney said it was clear that Gittens, who at one stage had been on remand, had his liberty taken away at some stage and his constitutional rights breached. “I however praise the magistrate for making such a bold decision in the interest of justice, and due to the weak evidence being produced,” Lashley added.


    Source: Nation


  4. CANADA

    Ontario lawyer wanted in real estate fraud worth more than $7.5 million

    https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-lawyer-wanted-in-real-estate-fraud-worth-more-than-7-5-million-1.5741492


  5. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

    Laywer charged with theft of money

    https://barbadostoday.bb/2022/02/23/laywer-charged-with-theft-of-money/


  6. Criminal charges against three men have been dismissed in the District ‘A’ Magistrates’ Court…..
    However, when their matters were called before Chief Magistrate Weekes on Tuesday, the prosecution still had no file to take any of the cases forward, resulting in the Chief Magistrate dismissing the cases.
    A fad or a trend?
    https://barbadostoday.bb/2022/02/23/chief-magistrate-dismisses-three-cases/


  7. Ex-Advocate GM accused of theft
    THE FORMER GENERAL MANAGER of the
    Barbados Advocate has been charged with entering the home of the company’s publisher and his father.
    Attorney Alvin David Bryan, 52, of Astoria, St George, appeared in the District “B” Boarded Hall Magistrates’ Court on Monday, where he denied entering the house of Anthony Bryan, sometime between April 23 and 30, 2021, and stealing 17 shirts, valued at $5 337, and a $175 bottle of liquor which belonged to the Advocate Publishing 2000.
    There was no objection to bail, and Magistrate Douglas Frederick released the accused with a surety of $3 000.
    Bryan, who was represented by Queen’s Counsel Andrew Pilgrim and attorney Kyle Walkes, returns to court on June 27.
    (HLE)

    Source: Nation


  8. Law group’s voice silent
    WHEN THE Barbados Bar Association was incorporated 82 years ago it served the interests of a small elite group who generally did not engage with or embrace the majority of the population beyond professional transactions.
    Today, there are more than 1 000 members of the Bar Association drawn from diverse backgrounds across the entire society. Times are changing but some things do not change easily, as is the case of the association, which is seemingly still aloof from the wider society.
    It remains silent on many critical issues impacting ordinary citizens, which makes hollow its stated objective “To further good relations and understanding between the Bar and the public”.
    The Bar Association naturally speaks in defence of the status and interest of the legal profession but as an influential special interest group, it has a responsibility to publicly address causes that need assistance. Its voice has been missing from too many critical matters, particularly those impacting poor people.
    One area of weakness in our society over many years and for which there is a genuine need for a champion is on behalf of people whose human rights and civil liberties have been breached. This is a matter a law society should take up and not leave to a handful of activist lawyers. The Land Acquisition Act over the years has caused severe hardships for many people who are often unable financially to challenge this law before the courts. Many suffer in silence. There is the very vexing issue of the tardiness and frustrating delays being encountered by many people with the Registration Department of the Supreme
    Court, especially as it relates to probate matters. No one seems to understand the hardships being endured. The Bar Association should show that it has not been withdrawn, but is robust in bringing about change for the betterment of the entire society. It should speak of its active engagement with the Law Reform Commission to overhaul numerous pieces of legislation that need urgent review. The association should also speak to its advocacy for solutions to deal with reducing the backlog of cases in the law courts and its push to get written judgments in a timely manner. We accept that the Bar Association has a vital function to perform, outside of its traditional offerings, both in the legal profession and in society at large. It also needs to get involved in new issues such as cybersecurity and its impact on the legal system as well as reform of the entire justice system.
    Lawyers must make a difference in the country’s development. This is why the Bar Association must be relevant in society.

    Nation Editorial


  9. Executor: Not a cent to date
    AN EXECUTOR said yesterday he knew that over $400 000, money from the sale of a property, went to the bank because he saw the bank’s stamp on the paperwork.
    However, up to today, said Irwin Thomas, he has not seen a single cent and calls, visits, even registered letters to attorney Norman Leroy Lynch have gone unanswered.
    Thomas was the first to testify when the theft and money laundering trial of Lynch continued in the No 2 Supreme Court yesterday.
    The witness said he knew the lawyer as he had previously conducted some transactions for his father. There were no issues then, Thomas added.
    When he became one of the executors of his father’s Will, Thomas said Lynch was the attorney who “prepared the documents and everything” relating to the sale of property at the Hope, St George.
    Deposit made
    He said a deposit of $50 000 was made by the buyer’s attorney and then the final transactions was paid over to the accused.
    “It (the sale) was completed but we never received money for the purchase of the land,” he told the court.
    “We saw a copy of the cheque paid to Mr Lynch and we had the dates it was paid over and he, himself, told us he had received the cheque,” Thomas recalled.
    “But not a cent we received. The sale had gone through and the lady had taken possession of the land. After the sale was made, she even started a project on the land.”
    The witness continued he, along with the other executors of the estate, made “several visits” to the accused’s office. They tried to contact him via telephone and sent registered mail to him.
    “I even dropped a note in his mailbox in Tino Terrace,” Thomas said, but each attempt was unsuccessful.
    The family then made “representation” to the then Attorney General and contacted the Barbados Bar Association.
    “We made many attempts to have this matter resolved but it was never resolved not even until this day. We have never received a cent.
    “The accused avoided us and we’ve never seen him since that day,” he said, adding no one offered any explanation for the non-payment of the money.
    Never told
    The family then “took it to the Fraud Squad”. Thomas told the court, when crossexamined, that his family was never told that the accused “was unwell”.
    “We left numerous messages with the clerks, both in person and via telephone, and they never told us he was unwell,” the witness said.
    Thomas further said he did not know what had become of the money. “I can’t answer that. You can ask Mr Lynch. I don’t have any money. I know it went to the bank.”
    When asked why he had reported the matter to police, Thomas said: “I was hoping the police would get in contact with him and we would get some kind of resolution.”

    Source: Nation


  10. Time to revisit international order
    by PETER LAURIE THE RUSSIAN WAR on Ukraine is the most dangerous international conflict since World War II.
    It threatens not just the people of Ukraine but, because of either Russian intransigence or miscalculation, the whole world. It can easily escalate in to World War III or, God forbid, a nuclear war.
    What makes the situation even more dangerous is Vladimir Putin himself, a megalomaniacal Greater Russian nationalist dictator, akin to Hitler.
    Let’s get something clear. Putin did not launch the invasion because he felt threatened by NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation). That was just the excuse. Like Hitler, after Germany’s defeat in the first World War, Putin, a former KGB officer, has always felt humiliated by the collapse of the Soviet Union.
    Putin wants to re-establish the Russian empire. He uses the same excuses as Hitler did in invading Poland and Czechoslovakia where there were significant German populations. By analogy, there are also significant Russian minorities in the Baltic states of Estonia (26 per cent) Latvia (25 per cent), and Lithuania (five per cent).
    From Putin’s third term in office, the ideological concept of a “Russian world” has become an intrinsic part of Russian diasporic policies. The “Russian world” comprises three pillars: Russian language, historical Soviet memory, and the Russian Orthodox Church.
    Soviet nostalgia is a tried and tested tool of the modern Russian state.
    No easy off-ramp
    As Putin said in 2014: “The Russian nation became the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders”, and it has been a long-term task of Putin to try to redefine those boundaries and reunify this fractured civilisation.
    All this is by way of saying that there is no easy off-ramp for Putin in his war on Ukraine. There are three possibilities of his backing down: 1. There are massive public protests against the war in Russia; but by controlling the media and policing the demonstrations he may thwart this.
    2. A “palace coup” in which the ministers of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Intelligence realise the war is not winnable and remove Putin from office.
    3. China puts the squeeze on him. This is the best bet, because without China, Russia cannot possibly withstand the pressure of Western sanctions and
    world-wide condemnation.
    We can only wait and see. Meanwhile, as the conflict drags on it will only compound the problems of supply chains exacerbated by the pandemic. We in the Caribbean do not have the luxury of believing that this conflict in faraway Europe will not impinge harshly on us.
    I was heartened by the prompt response of Barbados and CARICOM in not only announcing their condemnation of the Russian invasion but also voting at the UN to deplore the unprovoked Russian attack on the Ukrainian people.
    Crisis reveals
    What this crisis has revealed is how frail the present international order is. It seems totally inadequate to deal with what the recent Barbados UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) meeting identified as a crisis of the global common good, precipitated by climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic.
    This crisis impinges on every aspect of human life: health, education, housing, nutritious food, clean water, decent work, not to mention the resilience of our institutions. It jeopardises the right and hope of every human being to enjoy a life of dignity in security and freedom.
    We need a revitalised international cooperation to arrive at a shared moral vision for our interconnected planet; a vision grounded in universal respect for human rights, especially the eradication of structural racism and structural discrimination against women.
    Peter Laurie is a former head of the Barbados Foreign Service and author of several books.


    Source: Nation


  11. I guess Putin is a crooked lawyer in Barbados.


  12. @Hants

    Wow, one would thing these kinds of indiscretions only occur in Barbados.


  13. Yesterday, as he prepared to relocate from St Elizabeth to the Corporate Area, he set ablaze three judicial wigs regarded as symbols of the colonial past.

    One of the wigs belonged to his late father, Senior Puisne Judge Ronald Small.

    https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/news/20220312/attorney-burns-judicial-wigs-calls-removal-privy-council-final-court


  14. ” The client’s account maintained by attorney Norman Leroy Lynch showed a deposit of $50 000 in August 2005 and one for $407 634 in June 2007, a senior banking official said yesterday.

    That account, said CIBC FirstCaribbean’s director of retail banking channels Michelle Whitelaw, also showed three large withdrawals, including one for $290 714.60.

    The current balance, the witness said, was zero.”

    https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/2022/03/17/account-showed-two-deposits/


  15. @David March 9, 2022 4:37 PM “Hants Wow, one would thing these kinds of indiscretions only occur in Barbados.”

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/james-morton-lawyer-disbarred-1.6314024
    Prominent Nunavut and Ontario lawyer disbarred for bigamy, fraud after marrying 2 women


  16. https://globalnews.ca/news/5889285/james-morton-sentenced-bigamy/
    A once well-respected Ontario and Nunavut lawyer, and former PRESIDENT OF THE ONTARIO BAR ASSOCIATION, has been sentenced to six months house arrest and 50 hours of community service after pleading guilty to forging divorce documents and bigamy.


  17. Sad.
    Is that what we have come to?
    Comparable to scum?


  18. I remember sitting in a probability class and the professor telling us this theorem..
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

    From what I have seen here I am putting my money in the monkey’s.


  19. I am expecting to hear lynch’s lawyer go down the road of lynch not being of sound mind in the past years
    Reason why his memory is out of sync with all that has happened


  20. Are these cases anything more than money washing? Lawyer A steals a client’s money and washes it by paying legal fees to lawyer B over an extended trial.

    How can judges let these robberies continue by p retending to hold trials? Can these judges be thought of as honest when they allow sham trial after sham trial? By now, even a fool can see there is no justice for the victims.

    How deep is this long running scam? Is it just two lawyers washing a client’s money between them or are the judges jut a guilty?
    It is only when we stop taking things at face value, try to see the bigger picture and ask tough question that we will see things as they really are.

    How long will we allow this sham to continue. Victims are being victimized thrice, by a shady lawyer, by his crooked defense lawyer and by a shady court.


  21. I admire those who can move from post to post and maintain a serious train of thought.

    It is difficult to see these charades and not find gallows humor in them. It is difficult to watch wealth being transferred by every scheme that man can invent ranging from outright thievery to brilliant ideas of J-Bonds and to see outrageous taxation followed by redistribution of taxes that were collected.

    One blogger constantly speaks of generational poverty, but to not understand that what we are witnesses is wickedness and the transfer of money form one pocket to a favored pocket is a sign of our ignorance.

    It takes a special kind to come here aware of the mockery others make of us and pretend to hold serious conversations.

    All is broken.


  22. @ TheOGazerts,

    The fundamental problem is the system that allows lawyers to use a CLIENT account as their own line of credit..

    The honest lawyers don’t want to get involved in revising Bar Association ” professional standards “.


  23. @ TheOGazerts,

    Should you choose to return to Barbados to live / retire you should have gained enough information to know how to enjoy life in your homeland.


  24. Wonder why nobody has ever used mine.


  25. Courts hard to run, says judge
    THE LAW COURTS are “extremely difficult to run” and there are many factors, including too few attorneys at the Criminal Bar, which impact on their ability to get work done, a High Court judge said yesterday.
    “Some judges fight (to get work done) but you fight at the risk of being most unpopular because when you’re finished, everybody dislikes you,” Justice Carlisle Greaves said.
    He made the comments as none of the three matters set for hearing commenced in the No. 3 Supreme Court. Two were adjourned while the third was discontinued after the complainant opted not to give any evidence.
    The judge told the waiting jurors that while they might have previously heard criticisms about the courts, they would now have a greater appreciation for how difficult it was to run a court.
    “There are so many players and so many things, it takes a very strong judge to really get the court system to work. Sometimes judges get so frustrated because it would stress you out,” he said.
    “No prosecutor likes to hear a judge jumping on him, saying, ‘You should be ready, get ready’. No defence counsel wants to hear a judge pounding them to move on, so you get unpopular with him too.
    “And no accused man, who doesn’t want to go to trial, wants to hear you forcing them to go to trial. There are some who want to go to trial but can’t get to trial because something happened and he feels the judge [is] soft.
    “Then there is the complainant who comes and doesn’t want to proceed and the judge is not able to get the case on, and he looks over by the judge and feels he’s a joker,” Justice Greaves said.
    He noted that the low number of attorneys who practised criminal law was also a problem.
    “You have in a jurisdiction where, despite admitting 50 lawyers to the Bar every year in our case, only about two or three of those are going to practise criminal law because the reality is if you are looking to make a living, criminal law isn’t for you.
    “And if you have five courts trying to run and one case has four defendants, it’s difficult to get them together to get a case on.”
    The judge added there were also times when members of the public might not understand or agree with some sentences, feeling that the offender received a “slap on the wrist”.
    “So, for example, with all these gun cases, if we had to lock up all of these, we wouldn’t get any cases tried. Every man would say not guilty because he know that it is jail big that coming. And then we wouldn’t get off the ground because before you could blink, a fella got COVID-19 three times.
    “So courts are extremely difficult to run and not only in Barbados but in every place I know they are tough,” he stressed.

    Source: Nation


  26. Down to Brasstacks

    Main topic. TIEFING LAWYERS


  27. Hants,
    It is boring. This is an issue where solutions are known. The best approach is to separate the client fund and the lawyer as far and as soon as possible.

    Now they are ‘introducing’ a next layer and more paperwork. Papering over the problem.

    A problem no one wants to solve


  28. The worst kind of dishonesty is when people pretend to solve a problem and in reality do nothing.
    It is not only dishonest, it is an insult to the average Barbadian.
    Two or three honest lawyers going on the radio is a cover-up for dishonest lawyers. The show sickens me.
    I am willing to bet that if we had two or three one-armed lawyers by the end of the year, this problem would be resolved quickly.


  29. Compensation fund is a scam. Does not make a person whole
    Audit is a waste of time. Horse bolted, why look in the stall.
    All nonsense.


  30. With one arm, they can only be one armed.


  31. The compensation fund is not meant to make a claimant whole.


  32. I know four honest lawyers in Barbados.


  33. “The compensation fund is not meant to make a claimant whole.”

    That is exactly my point. If you take $5 from me, then I want back $5 (at least).
    Don’t smile and give me a check for 50 cents.

    That’s a game. It’s a fancy scam.


  34. Do a search of BU for compensation fund. The purpose of the fund and how it is managed should be separated.


  35. Sad.
    Is that what we have come to?
    Comparable to scum?

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    THE 2 x 3 ISLAND DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO LOOK IN THE MIRROR EASIER TO BURY ONE’S HEAD IN THE SAND.


  36. Listening to Brasstacks and another incredulous case this time of lawyer purportedly refusing to pay real estate agent her fee.


  37. @ Hants
    “I know four honest lawyers in Barbados.”
    ~~~~~~~~~~
    Poor you….!!
    At least two got you tricked…

    Bushie is betting that two are pretty young things…


  38. Lack of file upsets lawyer, court
    The case of two non-nationals who have signalled their intention to plead guilty but can’t because of a lack of a file provoked the ire of their attorney and the court yesterday.
    In fact, Justice Randall Worrell has urged Queen’s Counsel Andrew Pilgrim to file bail applications on behalf of both men.
    Anton James, of Golden Lane, Seaview, Tobago, and Krysten Trim, of Bon Accord Main Road, Tobago, are on remand at Dodds Prison after they were charged with possession, trafficking and possession with intent to supply of 426.92 pounds of marijuana on February 15, 2021.
    When their matters were called during yesterday’s Status Hearings in the No. 2 Supreme Court, it was revealed that the file from the magistrates’ court had still not reached the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. This was despite they indicating they wanted to plead guilty at the High Court.
    It was a situation that angered their attorney Pilgrim.
    “Imagine you go to a country and you plead guilty to weed, which is no longer the pariah that it used to be,” he told the court. “They just want to plead guilty, and I am not saying this is the prosecutor’s fault.
    “Our system is so beleaguered that we cannot get a man to say: ‘I am responsible. I want to do my time’. We cannot even do that,” he said.
    “What is it that would
    make whoever serious enough that they should get up off their respective haunches and do something for the benefit of the system? If it is that granting them personal bail will do that, then great. Let’s do that,” he said as he called the situation an “embarrassment”.
    “The judge should give these people personal bail and let them roam the streets of Barbados because we cannot prosecute them. We are incapable of prosecuting them.”
    Senior State Counsel Olivia Davis, who has conduct of the matter, said she had no choice but to wait until the documents were typed, signed and sent to her chambers – something over which she had no control.
    However, the judge stressed it was not fair for a prosecutor to have to be “begging a magistrates’ court to find out or begging the police to find out where is this file”.
    “That is foolishness . . . . Ignorance of the highest order. As if the prosecutor doesn’t have anything else to do. This has nothing to do with you, Ms Davis. You have tried your best.”
    Justice Worrell then noted the High Court had even tried to get the files out of the magistrates’ court by asking staff to work on weekends.
    “If you give them bail now it will be the worst thing on earth. We will hear they are nonnationals and they get bail but the court will say the reason for giving bail is ‘x y z’. . . . File the bail application and bring them,” he said and adjourned the matters until April 14. (HLE)

    Source: Nation


  39. 🙂
    Made me think of the train in my basement.
    It has the bells and whistles and even lets off steam, but I know it is just atoy.


  40. Since I live in Canada it is only fair that…….

    ” The Law Society of Ontario says there are “strong indications” that bar exam contents were leaked as it continues its investigation into a possible cheating scam.”

    https://www.cp24.com/news/law-society-of-ontario-says-there-s-strong-indicators-that-bar-exam-materials-were-leaked-1.5862012


  41. Lawyers appear to be a handful all over the globe.


  42. LEGAL BIND
    Judge says she has been locked out of Supreme Court office
    By Maria Bradshaw mariabradshaw@nationnews. com
    A senior High Court judge is claiming she has been locked out of her office under conditions tantamount to a summary dismissal.
    Reports indicate that Justice Dr Sonia Richards, who has been a judge for the past 16 years, has not been able to gain access to her office located on the third floor of the Supreme Court Complex because the locks have been changed and the office was being occupied by Justice Westmin James, who was installed two weeks ago as a temporary judge.
    Swipe deactivated
    Reports further indicate that her electronic swipe has been deactivated and as a result, she was only able to gain entrance into the Supreme Court building last week with assistance from other court staff, including security personnel.
    The action has resulted in the 66-year-old judge, who is on pre-retirement leave and who had still been utilising her office until she officially retires in May, to seek legal advice.
    Her attorney, Queen’s Counsel Garth Patterson, has written to President The Most Honourable Dame Sandra Mason, and copied it to Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, Attorney General Dale Marshall and Chief Justice Sir Patterson Cheltenham, asking for the judge to be reinstated to her office, as well as unimpeded access to the Supreme Court building and monetary compensation as a result of the embarrassing action.
    When contacted about the situation yesterday, the Chief Justice told the Sunday Sun: “She never was and is not locked out and the judge is not in her room. I can attest to that.”
    Justice Richards was reluctant to speak and directed queries to her attorney.
    When reached, Patterson said: “I can confirm that I have been approached by Dr the Honourable Sonia Richards to represent her in connection with a matter related to her office as a judge, but having regard to the sensitivity of the matter and the honour and the dignity of the courts, I wouldn’t wish to comment further.”
    A highly-placed legal source said the situation had left staff at the court in shock.
    “This is the first time in living memory that we have had a situation where a judge has been basically locked out of office before they officially retire. The practice in Barbados is that judges have had access to their offices to complete judgements and other outstanding legal matters before they go on retirement. This does not bode well for the judiciary,” the source said.
    It is understood that LEGAL BIND
    Judge says she has been locked out of Supreme Court office
    By Maria Bradshaw mariabradshaw@nationnews. com
    A senior High Court judge is claiming she has been locked out of her office under conditions tantamount to a summary dismissal.
    Reports indicate that Justice Dr Sonia Richards, who has been a judge for the past 16 years, has not been able to gain access to her office located on the third floor of the Supreme Court Complex because the locks have been changed and the office was being occupied by Justice Westmin James, who was installed two weeks ago as a temporary judge.
    Swipe deactivated
    Reports further indicate that her electronic swipe has been deactivated and as a result, she was only able to gain entrance into the Supreme Court building last week with assistance from other court staff, including security personnel.
    The action has resulted in the 66-year-old judge, who is on pre-retirement leave and who had still been utilising her office until she officially retires in May, to seek legal advice.
    Her attorney, Queen’s Counsel Garth Patterson, has written to President The Most Honourable Dame Sandra Mason, and copied it to Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, Attorney General Dale Marshall and Chief Justice Sir Patterson Cheltenham, asking for the judge to be reinstated to her office, as well as unimpeded access to the Supreme Court building and monetary compensation as a result of the embarrassing action.
    When contacted about the situation yesterday, the Chief Justice told the Sunday Sun: “She never was and is not locked out and the judge is not in her room. I can attest to that.”
    Justice Richards was reluctant to speak and directed queries to her attorney.
    When reached, Patterson said: “I can confirm that I have been approached by Dr the Honourable Sonia Richards to represent her in connection with a matter related to her office as a judge, but having regard to the sensitivity of the matter and the honour and the dignity of the courts, I wouldn’t wish to comment further.”
    A highly-placed legal source said the situation had left staff at the court in shock.
    “This is the first time in living memory that we have had a situation where a judge has been basically locked out of office before they officially retire. The practice in Barbados is that judges have had access to their offices to complete judgements and other outstanding legal matters before they go on retirement. This does not bode well for the judiciary,” the source said.
    It is understood that Justice Richards began her pre-retirement leave at the beginning of February and was still performing the duties of a High Court judge as she continued to hear cases, render decisions and write judgements, and that her name also appeared on the daily court list.
    Sources pointed out that it was usually customary for judges to be given a two-year extension to complete their outstanding matters but she was only given one year.
    Sunday Sun
    investigations revealed that two weeks ago the judge received a directive requesting she return her swipe card and the keys to her chambers “as a matter of urgency”.
    Informed sources said Justice Richards responded to the email indicating that she was still a judge and utilising her office, and requested a meeting with the Chief Justice to discuss the matter.
    Personnel at the Registry said the new judge was sworn in last week and a memo circulated to other judges indicating his acting appointment.
    Sources further revealed that on April 12, when she attended the Whitepark, St Michael court, she was able to gain access to the underground parking with her swipe key, but could not access the court building, neither her office, and had to seek assistance from security personnel who informed her that the lock to her office had been changed.

    Source: Nation


  43. Apologies for delays
    On two occasions between 2020 and last year, High Court Justice Dr Sonia Richards rendered apologies in two cases for the time it took for her to deliver her judgement.
    According to court records on November 30 last year, the day Barbados adopted republican status, in delivering judgement in the case of Matthew Holder and Sheron Holder, a 2013 civil suit, she apologised for the delay and suggested that a new directive which required judges to dispose of cases in six months, might contribute to the backlog of cases being further delayed.
    She pointed out that the since the decision in that case was reserved in 2017, “the court has delivered 39 written decisions. Of those 39 decisions, 24 of the cases were either reserved before this case, or were contemporaneous with this case, or were reserved within a few months of the close of this case. Generally, this court’s approach is to dispose of cases in order of reservation, with the oldest first in the queue. However, this approach cannot be applied to judgements with a six-month disposal limit. Such cases, of necessity, jump the queue”.
    Justice Richards added: “The court was called upon to review over 80 handwritten pages of oral evidence, with a myriad of filed documents and thick submissions. The last submission was filed on April 30, 2019. The length of the judgment is a reflection of the contractual context, and the extent of the evidence. Please accept my sincere apologies for my contribution to the delay in this matter.”
    In 2020 she also apologised for the lengthy delay in rendering her decision in the 2006 case of Marquita Butcher-Rayside vs Rayside Construction Ltd.
    In that instant, she stated: “This case was filed in 2006, and passed through the hands of various judges before being assigned to this court. It was ten years before the trial began in 2016 and concluded in March of 2017. The decision is delivered today after a three-year hiatus.
    “The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), as our
    apex court, has consistently urged the Barbados judiciary to issue judgements expeditiously. More recently, Parliament instituted a six-month time frame for judgments to be delivered. The failure to observe the six-month deadline exposes a judge to the possibility of disciplinary action.” Quoting a comment from now retired Justice David Hayton of the CCJ, she noted: “The Honourable Mr Justice Hayton reminded us that ‘judges should strive to deliver judgements within three months normally or in complex cases within six months, though it is appreciated that an unfortunate backlog of judgments waiting to be drafted may delay matters for some time’. He was referring to the exhortation of Saunders JCCJ, as he then was, in Reid v. Reid [2008]. “Hayton . . . made a most astute observation that precisely describes the circumstances of this court, that is, ‘an unfortunate backlog of judgments waiting to be drafted’. This backlog was built up over a number of years of continuous trials; and frequently with four out of five working days dedicated to trials which included interlocutory applications and cost hearings. While this backlog accrued, the head of the judiciary, counsel and the Barbados Bar Association were at all times aware of the precarious position of this court. No significant off-Bench time was ever offered as the backlog continued to escalate.
    “Add to this mix the fact that this court was without the services of a dedicated judicial assistant between June 2019 and May 2020. The court appreciates the frustration of parties and their counsel who continue to await outstanding judgments from this court. I hereby tender my sincere apologies for any contribution this court made to the delays in this matter.” (MB)

    Source: Nation


  44. Thanks for posting the ” Legal Bind ” and ” Apologies for delays ” articles.

    I read both articles. Reading is good for a 70 year old.


  45. @Hants

    Must be more to this than meats the eye.


  46. Justice Richards puts her case

    The following statement has been submitted by Queen’s Counsel Garth Patterson on behalf of High Court judge Justice Dr Sonia Richards.
    Justice Richards commenced pre-retirement leave on February 2, 2022. Her retirement as a judge of the High Court becomes effective on May 16, 2022. In the meantime, Justice Richards has continued to perform the functions and the duties of her office, while on leave, including Zoom hearings, administrative meetings and judgment writing.
    On Wednesday, April 6, 2022, Justice Richards received an email from the executive officer to the Honourable Chief Justice, which stated: “I am directed by the Hon. Chief Justice to request the return of your swipe card and the keys to your chambers as a matter of urgency. A new acting High Court judge is being sworn in. Kindly have your protection officer return them this afternoon to the secretary to the Chief Justice.”
    Responded by email
    Justice Richards responded by email directed to the Chief Justice on the same day, saying: “I am unable to return the keys and swipe card as you requested. As far as I am aware, I am still employed as a High Court judge and I continue to perform duties as such. Additionally, I have not vacated my office. I am still using the office space allocated to me, and there are files, books and personal items in the office space.”
    Justice Richards also expressed her concern that she was “being treated as though I have been summarily dismissed from office for some form of misconduct; and then denied access to my office. I am not aware that this course of action has been sanctioned by the relevant constitutional authority”.
    [She] confirmed that the email to the Chief Justice had been received. However, she received no response to it.
    On Tuesday, April 12, 2022, Justice Richards attended the Supreme Court building with a view to conducting business from the office that is assigned to her. From her initial appointment as a judge of the High Court in April 2006, Justice Richards was always assigned her own office space. Indeed, she has occupied her office in the current building from the time the courts were relocated there. She has never been required to share office space with anyone or to remove herself to accommodate anyone.
    On attempting to gain entry to the building, her security swipe access card was rejected, and she was denied entry. She gained admittance with assistance from another person. On attempting thereafter to gain admittance to her office, she realised that her key would not unlock the door. A call was made to security and eventually Justice Richards was let into her office by a security guard, who informed her that the lock to her office door had been changed. Justice Richards had never been previously notified that her security swipe card had been deactivated or the locks changed.
    On entering the office, Justice Richards immediately realised that another person had been put into occupation, as there were several files on her desk that she had not placed there. A few minutes later, a protection officer opened the office door and indicated that he was looking for the judge who was in the office the previous day. He revealed that he was the protection officer that was assigned to the new judge and thereafter removed himself to await the arrival of that judge.
    Justice Richards was never consulted about giving permission for the sharing of her office
    space with any other person.
    Later that morning, Justice Richards requested through the Registrar a key to her office and the reactivation of her security swipe access card. The Registrar indicated that she would discuss it with the Chief Justice, and a few minutes later Justice Richards was informed that the Chief Justice would “facilitate”. Justice Richards understood this to mean that she would be provided with a key and that her swipe card would be reactivated.
    Card rejected
    The following day, April 13, 2022, Justice Richards again attempted to access the Supreme Court building and, once more, her swipe access card was rejected. She was eventually admitted with assistance and her office unlocked by a security guard. Justice Richards is unaware of any disciplinary process that may have been initiated against her which would have led to her being denied access to her workplace. Justice Richards, on two subsequent occasions, again attempted to enter the building and her office and was met with the same result.
    In an article that appeared in the April 17, 2022 Sunday Sun, the following statement was attributed to the Honourable Chief Justice allegedly in response to the reports that Justice Richards had been locked out: “She never was and is not locked out and the judge is not in her room. I can attest to that.”
    Justice Richards categorically denies any suggestion that the events outlined above . . . did not occur . . . .
    On April 21, 2022, a further letter was dispatched by Justice Richards’ attorneys to, among others, the Honourable Attorney General seeking compensation for the damage to Justice Richards’ reputation arising from the events described.
    Justice Richards looks forward to a thorough investigation of these matters and is confident that she will be completely vindicated.

    Source: Nation


  47. Do you remember after the factory broke down for two weeks we were told that this year crop was ahead of where it was last year. This is possible.

    Now we have that being locked out of a building (twice), being unable to unlock your door and getting assistance from several individuals:to enter the building and your office is nothing more than an active imagination….
    “the Honourable Chief Justice allegedly in response to the reports that Justice Richards had been locked out: “She never was and is not locked out and the judge is not in her room. I can attest to that.”

    I have to read 1984 again. Eventually, they will proclaim her mad.

    Whoever is coordinating the government response is very wicked and nasty. But worse than that, these stories show that our leadership thinks its supporters are gullible and without sense.


  48. Minor correction for TheO..
    “But worse than that, these stories show that our leadership KNOWS its supporters are gullible and without sense.”

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending