Privy Council Watch
About MJM Limited
MJM is one of Bermuda’s leading law firms. We have a broad ranging practice with an emphasis on civil and commercial litigation, banking and finance, general corporate, trusts, insolvency, restructuring, insurance and reinsurance. We also offer advice and services to international individual and commercial private clients.
MJM Limited’s full profile on mjm.bm.
Bermuda is Britain’s oldest overseas territory and the Privy Council in London is the final Court of Appeal from Decisions of the Court of Appeal in Bermuda. Further, the Supreme Court and Appeal Court of Bermuda are bound by decisions of the Privy Council in cases from all jurisdictions where the Privy Council is the final appellate court. It therefore pays to keep a close watch on Privy Council judgments. For example a judgment was recently delivered by Lord Neuberger on 23rd July, 2013 following a hearing in the case of Antigua Power Company Limited v The Attorney General of Antigua and Barbuda and others (285 KB PDF) [2013] UKPC 23 in which he delivered a withering attack on the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal for its delay in handling the first appeal.
The case of Antigua Power Company Limited concerned the question of whether a joint venture agreement was approved by Cabinet on 16th May, 2006 a question which was answered in the affirmative by the Privy Council. However, significant delay had been caused by the Eastern Caribbean Court with over twenty two months passing between the closing argument concluding in the Court of Appeal and the handing down of judgment. As a result Lord Neuberger delivered his rebuke to the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal stating that:
a serious and unexplained delay of nearly two years by an Appellate Court in giving a decision on an appeal of no unusual complexity not only causes uncompensatable and unjustified worry but uncertainty and expense to the parties. More widely as Arden L.J. indicated it risks bringing the legal system into disrepute and therefore undermining the rule of law. There may have been a good reason for the delay in this case but if there was it should have been promptly and voluntarily communicated to the parties. Indeed after six months, and certainly nine months one would have expected a letter from the Court of Appeal to the parties acknowledging, explaining and apologising for the delay.
In Bermuda both practitioners and the courts are aware of the high standards that are demanded by the varied needs of domestic and international business. A timely response in MJM is seen as a principle of practice which combined with the efficiency of the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal contributes to maintaining the rule of law in Bermuda and enhancing the jurisdiction as a venue for significant commercial litigation.