Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court
  • About Us
    • Brief History of the Court
    • Court Overview
    • Meet the Chief Justice
    • Past Chief Justices
      • Sir Hugh Rawlins
      • Sir Brian George Keith Alleyne
      • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Adrian Saunders
      • Hon. Sir Charles Michael Dennis Byron
      • Rt. Hon. Sir Vincent Floissac
      • Honourable Sir Lascelles Lister Robotham
      • More..
        • Hon. Neville Algernon Berridge
        • Sir Neville Peterkin
        • Sir Maurice Herbert Davis
        • Justice P. Cecil Lewis
        • Sir Allen Montgomery Lewis
    • Judicial Officers
      • Justices of Appeal
        • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Davidson Kelvin Baptiste
        • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Mario Michel
        • Her Ladyship, the Hon. Justice Gertel Thom
        • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Paul Anthony Webster [Ag.]
        • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Gerard Farara, KC
        • His Lordship, the Hon. Justice Trevor Ward, KC
      • High Court Judges
      • Masters
    • Court of Appeal Registry
    • Court Connected Mediation
      • Court-Connected Mediation Practice Direction Forms
      • Mediation Publications
    • More…
      • Career Opportunities
      • Legal Internship
      • Transcript Requests
      • Directory
  • Judgments
    • Privy Council
    • Caribbean Court of Justice
    • Court Of Appeal Judgments
    • High Court Judgments
    • Digests of Decisions
    • Country
      • Anguilla
      • Antigua & Barbuda
      • Grenada
      • Montserrat
      • Saint Kitts and Nevis
      • Saint lucia
      • Saint Vincent & The Grenadines
      • Territory of the Virgin Islands
    • Year
      • 1972 – 1990
        • 1972
        • 1973
        • 1975
        • 1987
        • 1989
        • 1990
      • 1991 – 2000
        • 1991
        • 1992
        • 1993
        • 1994
        • 1995
        • 1996
        • 1997
        • 1998
        • 1999
        • 2000
      • 2001 – 2010
        • 2001
        • 2002
        • 2003
        • 2004
        • 2005
        • 2006
        • 2007
        • 2008
        • 2009
        • 2010
      • 2011 – 2019
        • 2011
        • 2012
        • 2013
        • 2014
        • 2015
        • 2016
        • 2017
        • 2018
        • 2019
    • Judgment Focus
  • Sittings & Notices
    • Schedule of Sittings
    • Court of Appeal Sittings
    • Chamber Hearing (Appeals)
    • Case Management (Appeals)
    • High Court Sittings
    • Status Hearings
    • Special Sittings
    • Notices
  • Court Procedures & Rules
    • ECSC Court of Appeal Rules
    • ECSC (Sittings of the Court) Rules, 2014
    • Civil Procedure Rules [WEB]
    • ECSC Civil Procedure Rules
      • Civil Procedure Rules 2000 [Amendments to Nov 2015]
      • Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2014
      • ECSC Civil Procedure (Amendment) (No.2) Rules
      • Civil Procedure Rules 2000 [Amendments to May 2014]
      • Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2013
      • Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2011
    • ECSC Criminal Procedure Rules
      • Criminal Procedure Rules SI No. 22 of 2015
    • ECSC Sentencing Guidelines
    • Non Contentious Probate Rules and Administration of Estates
    • Family Proceedings Rules
    • More..
      • Election Petition Rules
      • Legal Profession Disciplinary Procedure Rules (St. Lucia)
      • Code Of Judicial Conduct
      • Court Forms
        • Introduction of E-Filing
        • BVI Commercial Division E-Filing
        • Court-Connected Mediation Practice Direction Forms
      • Court Proceedings Fees
      • SILK Application Procedure
      • Practice Directions
      • Practice Notes
      • Video Conferencing Protocols
  • News & Publications
    • ECSC Media Gallery
    • Annual Reports
    • Appointments
    • Press Releases
    • Papers & Presentation
      • Opening of the Law Year Addresses
    • Tributes
  • E-Litigation
    • E-Litigation Portal
    • E-Litigation Instructional Videos
    • ECSC E-Litigation Portal User Information
    • Electronic Litigation Filing and Service Procedure Rules
    • Notices of Commencement
    • E-Litigation Publications
    • Training Site
  • J.E.I
    • JEI History
    • Structure of JEI
    • JEI Chairman
    • Mandate, Objectives, Standards
    • Programmes Archive
      • Conferences
      • Programmes & Projects
      • Symposiums
      • Training
      • Workshops
    • Upcoming Activities
more
    • About Us
    • Meet the Chief Justice
    • Civil Procedure Rules
    • Mediation
    • Careers
  • Contact
  • Saved for Later
 Home  E-Litigation Portal
  •  Court Procedures And Rules
    • Civil Procedure Rules
    • Court Forms
    • Election Petition Rules
    • Practice Directions
  •  Judgments
    •  All
    •  Court of Appeal
    •  High Court
    •  Digest of Decisions
  •  Sittings
    •  All
    •  Court of Appeal
    •  High Court
  • Sign In
    
    Minimize Search Window
    •       {{item.title}} Filter By Category {{SelectedFilters.length}}x Categories 
    •       {{item.title}} {{selectedCountries.length}}x Countries Country 
    •       {{item.title}} Filter By Year {{selectedOptions.length}}x Options 
    
    Sorry can't find what you're looking for try adjusting your search terms
    Appeal
    {{doc._source.post_title}}
    Page {{indexVM.page}} of {{indexVM.pageCount}}
    pdf
    Home » Judgments » High Court Judgments » Laura Mallalieu v Licensing Authority

    ST. KITTS AND NEVIS

     

    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

    MAGISTERIAL APPEAL NO . 9 OF 1999

    BETWEEN:

     

     

    LAURA MALLALIEU

     Appellant

    and

    LICENSING AUTHORITY

     Respondent

     

    Before:

    The Hon. Mr. C.M. Dennis Byron Chief Justice

    The Hon. Mr. Satrohan Singh  Justice of Appeal 

    The Hon. Mr. Albert Redhead Justice of Appeal

     

    Appearances:

    Mr. C. Wilkin Q.C. & Mr. Emile Ferdinand for the Appellant

    Mr. D. Merchant, OPP for the Respondent

     

    1999: September 27;

    November 22.

     

    JUDGMENT

     

    [1] BYRON C.J. : When we heard this appeal we allowed it with the concurrence of the learned OPP and promised to give our reasons in writing because of the peculiar conduct of the Magistrate, Mr. Haynes Blackman, in this case.

    [2] The appellant was charged for driving her motor car without due care and attention on 16th February, 1999 contrary to Section 53 of the Vehicles and Road Traffic Act Cap 270.

    [3] The matter came on for trial on 1st July 1999. The appellant pleaded not guilty and her counsel Mr. E. Ferdinand applied for an adjournment until 15th July 1999 on the grounds that the summons had been served just two days before. He needed to summon two witnesses and he was scheduled to be out of State on 8th July, 1999 the next date for Traffic Court The application was refuse.dIn his reasons for decision the Magistrate expressed the view that the alleged service effected two days earlier, and Counsel’s appointment out of State, were not good reasons to grant an adjournment and he did not believe that the idea of calling two witnesses was genuine.

    [4] Counsel applied for and obtained leave to withdraw from the case and left the court The Magistrate then proceeded with the hearing despite the appellant’s request for an opportunity to obtain legal representation. On that same day he convicted the appellant and fined her $475.00 in fourteen days or one month in prison.

    [5] The appeal record showed a very brief examination in chief of the virtual complainant and no cross-examintaion. The evidence did not address the ingredients of the offence. The exact location of the collision was not identified, the condition of the road was not described, the manner of the driving of the appellant was not addressed. There was no evidence on which a court would normally be expected to act in adjudicating a complaint of careless driving.

    [6] The Magistrate wrote his reasons of decision which were dated 14th July 1999, some 14 days after the hearing. These reasons were directed to the Court of Appeal. Despite this a non-judciial attitude was clearly evinced. One paragraph of his reasons directed at Counsel demontsrates:

    ” But then, the court was not too surprised over the position which Counsel had taken, in that ever since his “coronation· as President of the St.Kitts/Nevis Bar Association, Counsel appears to be smarting under the indubitable delusion that the magistracy is probably part and parcel of his “kingdom” and that the court should not only “bend over backwards” to accommodate him, but should “break its back” in so doing.·

    [7] In another section apparently aimed at the appellant personally, he opined:

    “With respect to the … Notice of Appea,l which she has every right to prosecute…the court notes that the word ·Justic·ehas been used….lndeed, the court recognizes that there are several attributes associated with the dispensingof •Justice· and the greatest of these is that “Justice• is blind. That is to say, “Justice• should not ever see class, colour, creed, or even the “anointed” and/or the “enthroned” within these social grouping•s.

    [8] On the legalprinciples that are applicable to an application for a reasonable opportunity to be heard the point is, very simply put that someone accused of crime needs more than an opportunity to stand up in court and express himself or herself. The right must of necessity extend to a reasonable opportunity to prepare the case before it comes on for hearing. This is a well established principle. (SeeR.v Thames Magistrates’ Court, ex parte POLEMIS (1974) 2 All E.R.1219.) The Magistrate was so full of emotion that he did not consider the principle. This case evincesan abuse of the judicial office to give effect to bias based on the social status that he attributed to the accused and her counsel. The matter was compounded by the fact that the record did not include evidence of conduct capable of supporting a conviction for careless driving. Conduct of this nature is inconsistent with the ethical standards expected from any level of our Judiciary.

    [9] The appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside.

     

    Dennis Byron

    Chief Justice

     

    I Concur 

    Satrohan Singh 

    Justice of Appeal

    I Concur 

    Albert Redhead

    <

    p style=”text-align: right;” align=”right”>Justice of Appeal

    https://www.eccourts.org/laura-mallalieu-v-licensing-authority/
     Prev
    Eric Williams et al v The Queen
    Next 
    CHARLES SERIEUX v FITZMARK
    Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court

    2nd Floor Heraldine Rock Building
    Waterfront
    P.O. Box 1093
    Castries
    Saint Lucia
    T: +1 758 457 3600
    E: offices@eccourts.org

    • About Us
      • Court Overview
      • Career Opportunities
      • Directory
      • Privacy Policy
    • Judgments
      • Court Of Appeal
      • High Court
    • Sittings
      • Chamber Hearing
      • Court of Appeal
      • High Court
    • News & Updates
      • Appointments
      • Press Releases
    • Civil Procedure Rules
      • Court Forms
      • Practice Directions
    © 2023 Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court. All Rights Reserved

    Submit your email address and name to subscribe for email notifcations.

    [email-subscribers-advanced-form id="1"]
    Bookmark
    Remove Item
    Sign in to continue
    or

    Bookmarked Items
    •  Home
    • Judgments
    • Sittings
    •  News
    •  more