Three years after assets held by former CLICO boss Leroy Parris were frozen by the High Court, his attorneys say their client is totally fed up with the long wait for justice.
“It is unconscionably long since the freezing order was in place,” Parris’ lead attorney, Hal Gollop, QC, complained Thursday.
Stating that his client was not at all amused about the situation, Gollop stressed the need for much swifter justice while pointing out that January 27, 2017 would be exactly three years that the order was in place freezing Parris’ $2.5 million bank account.
However, Gollop noted that while he was upset at the length of time the entire process has taken, the wait on a ruling by the Court of Appeal could not be considered unreasonable since this aspect of the case was only heard about three months ago.
Gollop and his legal team went to the Court of Appeal in October last year, asking it to reverse the High Court’s decision to freeze his client’s assets. At the end of the appeal hearing, the panel of justices reserved their judgment on the matter.
Justice William Chandler had granted the order in an ex parte hearing of the suit brought by CLICO’s Judicial Manager, Deloitte Consulting Limited, against Parris, as first defendant, and his company Branlee Consulting as second defendant. The estate of late Prime Minister David Thompson, represented by his widow Mara Thompson, the executrix, is the third defendant in the matter.
However, Parris has so far been unsuccessful in challenging the order, which he said had not only caused him hardship but had also prevented him and his company from meeting their “usual living and business expenses”.
As part of the constitutional motion, which was filed against the Attorney General back in 2015, Parris also argued that the delay in hearing a previous application to set aside the order was a violation of his rights, as he sought an unspecified amount in damages. However, the case has been hit by a number of snags.
First Justice William Chandler, who gave the original order, recused himself from hearing the matter. Then, another judge, Justice Jacqueline Cornelius, who was set to preside over the case, was rejected by Parris’ legal team on the grounds that her husband, Queen’s Counsel Ralph Thorne, had made adverse public comments on the matter on political platforms.