.jpg)
IN A recent appeal, the Caribbean Court of Justice ruled that the Guyana Court of Appeal went wrong when it refused an application from Attorney-at-Law, Mr. Basil Williams in relation to an extension of time to file an appeal on behalf of his client. The CCJ constituted by Justices Nelson, Wit and Hayton ruled “In the result, this court will set aside the Order of the Court of Appeal dated December 12, 2011, refusing an extension of time for appearing in the Court of Appeal and grant an extension for filing such appeal to November 9, 2012.
The respondent will pay the costs of this application to the applicant.
By an application dated May 30, 2012, Kampta Narine, also called Mohan, purports to seek special leave of the court to appeal against the refusal on May 17, 2012, of the Court of Appeal, constituted by Acting Chancellor Singh, Cummings-Edwards J.A. and Bovell-Drakes, to grant him leave to appeal to this court.
The Applicant had, by a summons, dated July 19, 2011, sought from Roy J.A. a singly Justice of Appeal, an extension of time for appealing against a judgment of Rishi Persaud J. dated February 18, 2011.
Roy J. A. dismissed the summons, but the appellant made a fresh application by motion to a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal for an extension of time to file an appeal.
The court surprisingly presided over by Roy. J. again dismissed the application. Roy J.A. detailed his reasons in a judgment delivered on December 12, 2011.
In the Judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered by Roy J. A. , he concluded that the applicant had not discharged the burden of placing before the court cogent and compelling reasons for his failure to file his appeal within six weeks after the judgment of February 18, 2011. The court held that the facts and matters relied on for an enlargement of time were “neither good and substantial nor … exceptional or extraordinary.
The CCJ ruled, “We respectfully part company with the learned Justice of Appeal, however when he states at [ 4 ] :
“Having regard to all that was said earlier, I do not propose to deal with the merits of the proposed appeal.”
The Order of the Court of Appeal was set aside.
Mr. Basil Williams had appeared for the applicant. Mrs. Prabha Persaud –Kissoon for the Respondent.
The respondent will pay the costs of this application to the applicant.
By an application dated May 30, 2012, Kampta Narine, also called Mohan, purports to seek special leave of the court to appeal against the refusal on May 17, 2012, of the Court of Appeal, constituted by Acting Chancellor Singh, Cummings-Edwards J.A. and Bovell-Drakes, to grant him leave to appeal to this court.
The Applicant had, by a summons, dated July 19, 2011, sought from Roy J.A. a singly Justice of Appeal, an extension of time for appealing against a judgment of Rishi Persaud J. dated February 18, 2011.
Roy J. A. dismissed the summons, but the appellant made a fresh application by motion to a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal for an extension of time to file an appeal.
The court surprisingly presided over by Roy. J. again dismissed the application. Roy J.A. detailed his reasons in a judgment delivered on December 12, 2011.
In the Judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered by Roy J. A. , he concluded that the applicant had not discharged the burden of placing before the court cogent and compelling reasons for his failure to file his appeal within six weeks after the judgment of February 18, 2011. The court held that the facts and matters relied on for an enlargement of time were “neither good and substantial nor … exceptional or extraordinary.
The CCJ ruled, “We respectfully part company with the learned Justice of Appeal, however when he states at [ 4 ] :
“Having regard to all that was said earlier, I do not propose to deal with the merits of the proposed appeal.”
The Order of the Court of Appeal was set aside.
Mr. Basil Williams had appeared for the applicant. Mrs. Prabha Persaud –Kissoon for the Respondent.
