Former Attorney General Phil Perinchief is to take his case against Government over a job rejection to the Court of Appeal.

The 64-year-old lawyer wanted to sue the Public Service Commission (PSC), Governor Sir Richard Gozney and Attorney General Kim Wilson for allegedly "unlawfully" appointing British lawyer Barrie McKay as Solicitor General instead of him, the only Bermudian to apply for the job.

But Puisne Judge Geoffrey Bell ruled this week that Mr. Perinchief applied too late to seek a judicial review of the decision to recommend Mr. McKay for the job over him.

Mr. Perinchief, who was sacked as Attorney General after the last general election, told The Royal Gazette yesterday: "I have instructed my attorneys today to appeal what I consider an extraordinary judgement. I'm confident the Court of Appeal will put things right."

The former PLP senator's application, made on December 3 last year, claimed that he was more than fit to get the $156,000-a-year Solicitor General job but failed to be appointed for political reasons.

His lawyers Trott and Duncan argued that, as a Bermudian, Mr. Perinchief had to be given preference over non-Bermudian Mr. McKay, even if the latter was more fit for the post than their client.

Mr. Justice Bell said the basis of the complaint stemmed from the PSC's decision of May 12, 2008, to recommend Mr. McKay and that Mr. Perinchief should have made his application within six months of that date.

He said no good reason had been advanced to explain the failure to apply for leave to seek judicial review within the legal time frame so he had to refuse the application.

Mr. Perinchief worked in the Attorney General's Chambers from 2000 to 2006 as Principal Crown Counsel, when he acted as Solicitor General on a number of occasions.

He became AG in October 2006 but was fired just over a year later after losing St. George's South for the PLP in the December 2007 General Election.

He applied to be Solicitor General in January 2008 and found out he was unsuccessful in April. His application said a former colleague informed him in October 2008 that Mr. McKay had got the job.

Mr. Bell said: "One must inevitably ask the question what good reason could there be for Mr. Perinchief's lack of action."

The judge said he could have asked who got the job in July and "must or should have appreciated the need to act promptly and in any event within six months of the date of the Commission's recommendation".

He awarded costs to the respondents.