Solicitor General seeks to clarify Tempura ruling

In the edition of the Caymanian Compass dated Jan. 16, 2014, an article was published under the heading “Tempura lawyer reinstated.”

In the article reference is made to the judgment dated Oct. 29, 2008 of Sir Peter Cresswell sitting as an acting judge of the Grand Court. The judgment is reported at 2009 CILR 57. A further judgment followed on Dec. 23, 2008.

In the course of the article it is said “That ruling [presumably a reference to the judgment of Oct. 29, 2008] and Justice Peter Cresswell’s finding that Mr. Polaine was not qualified to practise in the Cayman Islands, were the basis of the original, uncontested, decision of the Bar Association to take action against Mr. Polaine.”

I also refer to the editorial in the edition of the Caymanian Compass dated Jan. 17. The suggestion that the acting judge found that Mr. Polaine was not qualified to practice in the Cayman Islands is inaccurate. If you read the judgment you will see that in section 11 of the judgment the judge set out the submissions of counsel for the applicant (Justice Henderson) ­— see in particular paragraph 57. The judge then set out the submissions of the RCIPS (section 12). Thereafter the judge set out his analysis and conclusions in sections 13 to 17 on the issues he was asked by the parties to decide.

At no stage in his analysis did the judge make any finding as to whether Mr. Polaine was or was not qualified to practice in the Cayman Islands.

- Advertisement -

There is a fundamental distinction between what the parties may submit during a hearing and what a judge in the event decides and it is misleading to confuse the former with the latter.

The article published on Jan. 16 implied that an erroneous finding by the judge formed the basis of the original uncontested decision of the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal. No such finding one way or the other was made.

Jacqueline Wilson

Solicitor General

[Editor’s note: The Compass is always pleased to receive and share information that helps to clarify the record on significant issues that are in the public interest.]