By George Barclay

THE HEARING of a constitutional motion concluded yesterday at the Guyana Court of Appeal where the University of Guyana is appealing a Justice Chang decision that asked the university to review the examination marks by Applicant Clairmonte Cletus Cox.Decision has been reserved. Cox, represented by a team of lawyers headed by Mr. Rex Mc Kay, S.C, had on August 14, 2013, applied to the Acting Chief Justice for certain prerogative reliefs.

In his Affidavit in support of his Origination Motion the applicant deposed that the University of Guyana was a body corporate constituted and founded under section 3 of the University of Guyana Act, Chapter 39:02, with the Board of Governors as its governing body. In September 2000 he was admitted to a course of study at the University leading to a degree of Bachelor of Laws (LLB).

On December 4, 2000, he entered into a loan agreement with the Ministry of Finance acting on behalf of the Government of Guyana (the lender for the sum of $300, 000 on terms and conditions set out in a written agreement)
Despite his default in making repayment of that loan, he was allowed to attend classes for the final year and to write the examinations in seven subjects.

According to Acting Chief Justice Chang in his decision, “He wrote two supplemental examinations, i.e. of Succession and Law of Insurance to the Assistant Registrar.

“But, on September 19, 2012, the High Court granted to him a Writ of Mandamas compelling the University to release to him his examination grades for the academic year 2002 / 2003. Seven months after the service of the writ of Mandamas was served on the University, his examination results were released to him.

“On May 7, 2013, pursuant to Rule 12 of the University Regulations, he applied to the Assistant Registrar for examinations of the University within the prescribed time and demanded a review of the two subjects he had failed.

“On June 4, 2013 he received an e-mail from the Principal and Vice Chancellor of the Universitry rejecting his demand for a review and demanding that he pay all outstanding fees and penalties as a condition precedent to being granted the review.”

Chang went on to say “The court therefore sees it fit to order that the decision of the University and the Principal and Vice Chancellor to refuse the applicant’s application for a review of his examination results of his two failed examination courses in the law of Succession 313 and Trade Union Law 323 be quashed by Certiorari.

“The court also sees it fit to order by Mandamus that the University and the Principal and Vice Chancellor do review or cause to be reviewed the applicant’s examination marks in respect of the said two courses within one calendar month of the rendering of this decision.”

The University of Guyana appealed the ruling of the then Acting Chief Justice, which hearing by the Court of Appeal, headed by Acting Chancellor Carl Singh, concluded yesterday.

Attorney-at-law Mr. Kamal Ramkarran, who appeared for the University declared, “The Chief Justice, in finding in favour of the Respondent, took matters into consideration which were not addressed by the parties and the Appellant was never given an opportunity to address those issues before an unfavourable finding to it was made.”

Attorney-at-Law Mr. Neil Boston, one of the lawyers representing Mr. Cox said: “In order for this appeal to succeed the Appellant must establish that the decision of the Chief Justice is vitiated by unreasonable, self-misdirection, irrelevant considerations or some other legal error, for otherwise no point of law arises.