No disclosure of amount paid to British silk
The Supreme Court has failed to disclose the amount paid to a British King’s Counsel who was hired to preside over a civil case brought by a former premier, although it pledged to try to do so.
Martin Forde KC was appointed as an assistant justice to hear the lawsuit launched by Ewart Brown against the Deputy Governor, Attorney-General, and Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to a criminal investigation.
However, more than a year after the last hearing in the matter, Mr Forde KC has yet to deliver his ruling.
Larry Mussenden, the Chief Justice, told The Royal Gazette this week that Assistant Justice Martin Forde, who is based in England and has conduct of Ewart Brown’s civil case, had reserved judgment on the matter after hearing “substantive submissions”.
Mr Justice Mussenden said the acting puisne judge had subsequently “suffered a fall with injuries that sidelined him from his usual duties for six months”.
He added: “Upon his return to his duties, he has sought to catch up with his professional duties in the courts of England and Wales where he has had several back-to-back trials, as well as progressing his judgment/ruling on the case in Bermuda.
“Forde AJ has indicated that he expects to issue his judgment/ruling in December or early January 2025.”
A public access to information request was submitted to the Registry of the Supreme Court in March this year asking for the “contract and remuneration” paid to him and to another British silk, Hugh Southey KC, who was appointed an assistant justice to hear legal cases concerning the Commission of Inquiry into Historical Land Losses.
The Pati requester, justice campaigner Eron Hill, received a response from the Acting Registrar on April 19, which said “further research” was required.
She wrote that the registry would “endeavour to provide this information” by June 10.
Mr Hill, who gave the Gazette permission to identify him as the Pati requester, heard nothing, so followed up twice in the summer.
The Acting Registrar e-mailed on July 10 to say there was no update. “Key members of staff (myself included) have been out of the office,” she wrote. “We are short staffed and have competing deadlines.”
Mr Hill said he had yet to receive the figures.
The Gazettereported yesterday that the last hearing in Dr Brown’s case was in November 2023 and that other Supreme Court civil judgments, in cases also presided over by acting judges, were still outstanding after many months.
A source told the newspaper there had been disagreements on billing between some acting judges, who are contractors rather than permanent, salaried government employees, and Alexandra Wheatley, the Supreme Court Registrar.
Mr Hill’s Pati request also sought records about other judicial appointments and the response included the fact that at the time there were three permanent puisne judges in the Supreme Court — Nicole Stoneham, Shade Subair Williams and Juan Wolffe — in addition to Chief Justice Larry Mussenden.
Since then, former prosecutor Alan Richards has been appointed as a puisne judge. Mrs Justice Stoneham, the head of the matrimonial division, has been absent from court since July and is understood to be suspended.
The Pati response revealed that former Puisne Judge Charles-Etta Simmons was re-engaged as an assistant justice on January 12 this year, with her contract to continue for as long as needed for her to deal with proceedings before her.
Under that agreement, the judge is paid $600 per day; she received $5,228.58 for the period January 24 to February 12 this year.
The Pati disclosure said five people had been appointed as acting puisne judges since 2020: Mr Justice Wolffe, when he was senior magistrate; magistrate Craig Attridge; Mrs Justice Wheatley; former Crown Counsel Takiyah Burgess; and former Attorney-General Mark Pettingill, who runs a private law firm.
The Acting Registrar wrote that Mr Pettingill sat as an acting justice in the criminal case of Pelealkhai Williams in August 2022 and received $13,579 for the appointment.
She wrote: “ … aside from Mr Pettingill, the persons listed above were entitled to receive for the period of their appointment the difference between their substantive salary and the salary payable to a puisne judge, in accordance with the BPSU salary scales.”
The Acting Registrar wrote that more research was required to obtain the precise amounts paid and the court would endeavour to provide the information, if able, by June 10 “but can confirm in the interim that Ms Burgess did not receive from the Department [of Public Prosecutions] any remuneration for her appointment”.
The Acting Registrar also pledged to try to share the amount paid to Cayman Islands magistrate Valdis Foldats, who heard a case in the Magistrates’ Court in 2019 against now-retired Magistrate Khamisi Tokunbo. Mr Tokunbo was cleared of failing to provide a breath test.
Mr Hill said yesterday he was still waiting for all the payment amounts for the temporary appointments to be shared with him.
Mr Forde KC, of 1 Crown Office Row chambers in London, could not be reached for comment.
An earlier response to a separate Pati request submitted by Mr Hill to the courts revealed that puisne judges are on public service pay scale 48, which amounts to $205,068 a year. They also receive an annual housing allowance of $1,917.
The Chief Justice is on PS 51, amounting to $233,854 a year, and can live in a government-owned property, if he chooses to take up that employment benefit. Former Chief Justice Ian Kawaley did, but Mr Mussenden’s predecessor Narinder Hargun did not according to the Pati disclosure.
• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers
