-
by pltm
(PLTM) - Speaker of the House of Assembly Hon. Julian Willock believes that it is highly unusual for the court to require proof of how lawyers are being financed.
He made the comments today September 22 during the sitting of the House of Assembly.
The Speaker said there has been much public discourse within the last week about a matter that is in the court, as to who is to pay the legal costs for the withdrawal of an injunction brought before the courts in his official capacity as Speaker. The injunction, according to Willock was aimed at preventing the three Attorneys attached to the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) from carrying out duties in relation to their appointments until and unless their appointment is deemed to be valid, in keeping with the Legal Professions Act of 2015.
“Never in recent jurisprudence in the Region or the United Kingdom has there been an issue when a plaintiff brings a matter to court, loses or withdraws, that the case goes to a legal or public debate about who will take up the cost,” he stated.
He added, “furthermore, it is highly unusual for the Court to require a party to prove how their lawyers are being financed.”
Speaker Willock said many have argued that this is an overreach of the judicial branch, with no regards or respect for the three equal branches of Government.
“I concur and further view it as Judicial activism and interference against the Legislature, as the House of Assembly has the right to bring any matter to court, independent of the Honourable Attorney General,” he said.
The Speaker said that is why, from 2004, the House, in its wisdom, voted to set up an account via the Budget process within the House of Assembly for such actions, under the ambit of the Clerk.
“I will not speculate as to why suddenly, it is a concern for a British Judge, as to who pays for a matter that was clearly stated in all filings coming from the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker. I will conclude by saying that what is at stake here is our young democracy, the rule of law, and those who wish to deliberately undermine and intimidate the Legislature,” the Speaker said.
He said the Virgin Islands must be a place where the rule of law applies to all residents, visitors, all branches of Government, and even personnel of the Commission of Inquiry.
Ag. Commercial High Court Judge Adrian Jack recently requested the information about the contractual arrangements between Willock and Silk Legal after receiving conflicting claims over which party was responsible to pay legal costs associated with the injunction proceedings. According to the published court documents, the CoI defendants have served costs schedule claiming $71,388.59, while the Attorney-General has served a schedule claiming $6,084.
During submissions on costs, the AG Chambers had disputed Hon. Willock's claim that there was an agreement between Mr. Willock and the BVI Government.
She said that any agreement up to $100,000 would require the authorisation of the accounting officer for the House of Assembly, who was the Clerk to the House of Assembly. Any agreement over $100,000 required the authorisation of the Financial Secretary. The Attorney-General’s investigations, she said, showed that no such authorisations had been given.
Judge Jack said, as a result, Hon. Willock had to file an affidavit by the close of business on September 7 explaining the funding arrangements.
-----
Copyright 2023 by Virgin Islands Platinum News. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
