| In at least two recent rulings of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), it would appear that the Guyana Court of Appeal has caused some setbacks in the smooth flow of the judicial system.Chancellor Justice Carl Singh at the ceremony of the Modernization of Justice System Project at the Duke Lodge on Monday last, opined that the performance of judges in the High Court is ‘awfully inadequate’. He said that the hallmark of an efficient and effective judicial system is timely delivery of decisions by judges.The Chancellor expressed disappointment over the slothfulness at which High Court judges are conducting matters. It has however been presented that in at least two cases where the Chancellor was the most senior on the panel, the Court of Appeal failed to deliver its ruling in a timely manner thus forcing the parties to seek special leave to take their issues to the CCJ.In the matter of Madanlall Mahamad and S&R Abdulla Cane Farming Inc.,Cheap Jerseys Free, the CCJ on July 22, 2013 made several rulings that highlighted where the Court of Appeal erred and thus caused a setback in the course of justice.Madanlall Mahamad had brought an action against the S&R. S& R later filed an action against Mahamad before Justice Rishi Persaud in the commercial court.Again S&R filed an action to amend the initial ruling of the High Court judge, and that was later done. On a subsequent date, Mahamad was granted by a single judge of the Court of Appeal,Brad Richards Red Wings Jersey, Justice B. S. Roy leave to appeal “out of time” against the orders of Justice Rishi Persaud.S&R Abdulla Cane Farming in response applied to the Full Bench of the Court of Appeal for an order reviewing the order of Justice Roy. On the hearing of that application, the Court of Appeal held that Justice Roy had erred in making the order since the Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an order made in chambers by Rishi Persaud.S&R then appealed to the CCJ for special leave to appeal the order of the Court of Appeal discharging the orders of Roy in both the first and second actions.The CCJ also outlined the basis for the application of special leave after outlining the principle issue.Among the issues touched on, the CCJ said in deciding whether to exercise its independent discretion to grant special leave, the Court is entitled to look at the reasons why the Court of Appeal declined to give leave to appeal.“Because the Court of Appeal clearly erred and set aside the order of Justice Roy, it is appropriate to grant special leave to appeal to correct an error of law and to treat the hearing of this application as the hearing of the appeal.”In the case of Godfrey Andrews and Lester Moore where the CCJ ruled on July 23, 2013, it was said that the application is about the interpretation of rules of procedure designed to reduce the delays.The CCJ had to determine whether the case was in fact deserted in light of facts before the Court, but beyond the knowledge of the Court of Appeal. The Applicant,Artemi Panarin Jersey, Godfrey Andrews,NBA Authentic Jerseys, was said to be the titled owner of a property, while the Respondent Moore was also claiming the property.It was determined that Andrews was the rightful owner and Moore was the trespasser. However,Cheap Jerseys From China, Moore requested to appeal the matter, which was said to have been done within the stipulated time frame for an appeal to be made.It was however noted by the Court of Appeal that the matter was deserted at that time and documents showing that an appeal was made within the time frame were omitted. The CCJ noted that the “13 and 14 of the Index of the Record of Appeal settled by the Registrar were inadvertently omitted from the Record of Appeal.”The Court of Appeal stated, “At the commencement of the hearing of this appeal, the Court sought the views of Counsel appearing for the parties on its observation that at the time the matter was adjudicated on in the High Court,Kyle Korver Hawks Jersey, it appeared that on interpretation of the provisions of Order 32 Rule 9, the matter seemed deserted and in the absence of a consent to or an approved application for a revivor, it was not competent for the Judge to proceed to a hearing of the matter.”While the two sides spoke on the documents relating to the appeal, the CCJ noted that the two documents relating to the request for appeal had to be submitted.The CCJ thus ruled that the application for special leave would be extended. Special leave to appeal the order of the Court of Appeal was also granted. |
