3/10/2013
START DATE
END DATE
7/10/2013
Bermuda Ombudsman v. Corporation of Hamilton et al.
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
Supreme Court of Bermuda
CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
IAN R.C. KAWALEY CJ
Nathaniel Turner Michelle Ashton Attride-Stirling & Woloniecki
Eugene Johnston Dawn Johnston J2 Chambers
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The case revolves around the Ombudsman's attempt to certify the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Hamilton for contempt stemming from their failure to respond to summonses for an interview regarding the transparency and public consultation of the Hamilton Waterfront project lease process
SUMMARY:
Whether failure to attend an interview constitutes contempt under the Ombudsman Act 2004 and if the respondents had a right to legal representation during the Ombudsman s investigation
OUTCOMES:
Contempt proven no right to legal representation as of right at the investigation stage
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Plaintiff/Claimant (Office of the Bermuda Ombudsman)
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
Bermuda Ombudsman v. Corporation of Hamilton et al.
The case revolves around the Ombudsman's attempt to certify the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Hamilton for contempt stemming from their failure to respond to summonses for an interview regarding the transparency and public consultation of the Hamilton Waterfront project lease process