Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com

SKNBuzz Radio - Strictly Local Music Toon Center
My Account | Contact Us  

Our Partner For Official online store of the Phoenix Suns Jerseys

 Home  >  Headlines  >  NEWS
Posted: Tuesday 27 November, 2012 at 3:39 PM

Press Release

Logon to vibesnevis.com... Nevis News 
By: Press Secretary CCM, Press Release

    CHARLESTOWN Nevis, November 27th, 2012  -- The much awaited hearing of the Application by the Honourable Joseph Parry and Mr Hensley Daniel asking the Court of Appeal to relieve them of paying costs to Mark Brantley in the now famous election Petition appeal matter came on before the Court of Appeal in Basseterre, St. Kitts today.
     
    At the commencement, Madam Chief Justice Pereira indicated that she was uncomfortable proceeding unless the panel of Judges was the same as the panel that heard the appeal. The panel that heard the appeal comprised Madam Chief Justice Pereira and Justices of Appeal Davidson Baptiste and Ian Mitchell. The panel sitting in St Kitts today comprised Madam Justice Pereira and Justices of Appeal Louise Blenham and Tyrone Chong.
     
    Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes, SC representing Mark Brantley accepted the position of the Court as being correct. Senior Counsel Anthony Astaphan, SC representing Messrs Parry and Daniel, initially resisted but was forced to accept the correctness of the Courts position.
     
    The Court ordered both Parties to file full written submissions. Messrs Parry and Daniel must file within 14 days. Mr Brantley must file within 14 days thereafter and Messrs Parry and Daniel must reply, if at all, by
    January 3rd, 2013.
     
    The Court accepted the suggestion of Mr Mendes, SC that this matter be considered on paper without the need for further oral submissions. The decision then will come some time after January, 3rd, 2013.
     
    Mr. Mendes, SC indicated to the Court that this was perhaps the kind of matter that the Court could reopen but questioned what new Order would replace the Order complained of. It remains the position of Mr Brantley that the order for costs was entirely appropriate and that there was before the Court sufficient evidence for inferences adverse to all the NRP actors to be made.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    *************************
      DISCLAIMER
      
     
    This article was posted in its entirety as received by SKNVibes.com. This media house does not  correct any spelling or grammatical error within press releases and commentaries. The views expressed therein are not necessarily those of SKNVibes.com, its sponsors or advertisers   
              

     

Copyright © 2024 SKNVibes, Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy   Terms of Service