2/14/2020
START DATE
END DATE
23-Mar-20
Michael Maclean v The Director of Public Prosecutions
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
CIVIL JURISDICTION
Shade Subair Williams J
Mr. Charles Richardson (Compass Law Chambers)
Mr. Rod Attride-Stirling (ASW Law Limited)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The claimant sought judicial review against the DPP's decision to prosecute him for criminal offenses alleging no basis for the charges and questioning the procedural fairness and rationality of the decision
SUMMARY:
The issues revolved around the appropriateness of judicial review as a remedy for challenging prosecutorial decisions and the conduct of the claimant in seeking such review
OUTCOMES:
Costs awarded to the defendant on a standard basis for the hearing and related preparations but no costs awarded for the preparation of written submissions after the initial hearing. The claimant's request for indemnity costs was denied due to lack of grave impropriety or dishonesty in initiating the review
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Defendant
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies