Between Wayne Carlos Myles Applicant v HM the King Respondent
| Jurisdiction | Cayman Islands |
| Judge | Birt, JA |
| Judgment Date | 17 May 2023 |
| Docket Number | CRIMINAL APPEALS 11/2021, 13/2021 & 14/2021 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Cayman Islands) |
The Rt. Hon Sir John Goldring, President
The Hon Sir Richard Field, Justice of Appeal
The Hon Sir Michael Birt, Justice of Appeal
CRIMINAL APPEALS 11/2021, 13/2021 & 14/2021
(SCA#0004/2020, 0005/2020 & 0006/2020 SC#00728/2017, SC#03675/2016 & SC#02851/2017 (1) & (2))
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS COURT
For the reasons set out in a judgment dated 18 July 2022, this Court dismissed the Applicant's appeal against the decision of the Grand Court (Chapple J) on 29 July 2021 dismissing his appeal against his conviction before the Summary Court on 12 June 2019. This Court also dismissed his appeal against sentence.
By Notice of Motion dated 31 March 2023, the Applicant now applies to this Court for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (“the Privy Council”) against his conviction.
This raises the issue of whether this Court has jurisdiction to consider an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in criminal cases.
In Gonzalez and Suarez v R [ 1984-85 CILR 256] the Court of Appeal for Jamaica, sitting as the Court of Appeal for the Cayman Islands, considered the terms of the Cayman Islands (Appeal to Privy Council) Order 1965 (“the 1965 Order”) and in particular, the terms of section 3 which provided as follows:
“ Subject to the provisions of this Order, an appeal shall lie:
(a) as of right from any final judgment, where the matter in dispute on the appeal amounts to or is of the value of three hundred pounds sterling or upwards, or where the appeal involves directly or indirectly some claim or question to or respecting property or some civil right amounting to or of the said value or upwards; and
(b) at the discretion of the Court, from any other judgment, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court, the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great or general importance or otherwise, ought to be submitted to Her Majesty in Council for decision.”
Having reviewed the jurisprudence of the Privy Council in some detail, the Court concluded that section 3 applied only to civil cases and the Court did not have any jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal in criminal cases. The reference to ‘ any other judgment’ in section 3(b) was a reference only to any other civil judgment. This conclusion is reflected in the headnote which reads:
“ The court, sitting as the Court of Appeal for the Cayman Islands, did not have jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal to the Privy Council in criminal cases. Appeals to the Privy Council from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial