JUDICIARY RUMBLES

ONE week before the start of the new law term on September 16, there are rumblings in the Judiciary once more relating to high profile cases, staffing, judges transfers and the expansion of the Family Court.

The developments again put the spotlight on Chief Justice Ivor Archie whose tenure as head of the Judiciary has been troubled for calls for Government to review his management of the fraternity – including a call for him to be impeached which the Prime Minister has said he would not do.

One matter which continues to simmer relates to the lawsuit of former chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar. This week, Sunday Newsday learned the lawsuit has been re-assigned as the judge who previously presided over the matter has been transferred to the Family Court.

And, while re-assignment of cases is nothing new when a judge has been transferred from one division to another or has retired, there are concerns about the Ayers-Caesar case and how the re-assignment was done.

Judicial sources said the case, which was previously on Justice David Harris’ docket, has been re-assigned to Justice Betsy Ann Lambert-Peterson as well as all Harris’ other civil cases.

Harris has been transferred to the Family Court where Lambert-Peterson was previously assigned.

Already notices to litigants have been sent out advising of the re-assignment of cases to the new judge, however, despite repeated requests for information on Harris’ civil court docket, the Judiciary has refused to respond to questions from Sunday Newsday.

Sunday Newsday understands that Harris had close to 500 matters and notices would have gone out to litigants whose cases were originally adjourned to September.

The notices also advised that the re-assignment of the cases were done under the Docket Management System.

In 2017, when the issue of forum shopping was raised – a practice adopted by litigants to get their cases heard in a particular court that is likely to provide a favourable judgment – the Judiciary advised that the assignment of cases to judges was done through an electronic system administered by the High Court Civil Registry.

Last month, Ayers-Caesar’s attorney Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, SC, was quoted as saying he was unaware of Harris’ transfer to the Family Court, but if it was the case, it was a cause for concern.

He also questioned if there was a reassignment of the case to another judge and who made the decision.

"Was it the Chief Justice? Or was it another judge?

"If it was another judge, I would like to know the name of the judge. The matter will come back before Justice Harris after the Privy Council appeal. If Justice Harris has been involved since the start of the case for the last year and he is fully aware of all the facts in the matter, why was he taken away to Family Court?"

He said while he had no problem with a re-assignment, Harris had to come back to do the case, and if it was assigned to another judge, then he (Maharaj) wanted to know if the Chief Justice was responsible for the re-assignment.

He said in cases in which the CJ may have an interest, re-assignment of cases are then done by the next senior judge.

“Who reassigned this case, the Chief Justice or Justice (Allan) Mendonca?' Maharaj asked.

In her lawsuit, Ayers-Caesar is challenging her short-lived judicial appointment and says she was pressured by the JLSC to resign after having been told either sign an already prepared resignation letter or her appointment would be revoked by the President.

In May, the Court of Appeal granted Ayers-Caesar permission to have the CJ and three others cross-examined on what transpired on April 27, 2017, when she says she was forced to resign as a puisne judge two weeks after being sworn-in by former president Anthony Carmona.

The JLSC has since appealed the decision to the Privy Council.