South lawyers ask for use of Princes Town courtroom

The Princes Town Family Court and the Trinidad South District Court at Naparima/Mayaro Road in Princes Town. - File photo by Lincoln Holder

SOUTHERN lawyers have proposed using an available courtroom at the Princes Town District Court for civil trials.

When the San Fernando High Court was closed for infrastructural upgrades in August 2023, judges on the civil bench were told the Princes Town Family Court would be available for their use for San Fernando cases and encouraged to hold virtual hearings where possible.

However, at least two judges were unsuccessful in getting courtrooms at the court.

They have since been told the San Fernando Supreme Court is not expected to be ready until the last quarter of 2024.

In an update to judges, deputy court executive administrator Wendy Lewis-Callender said, “Please note that we have had some setbacks with this project because of the scope of works and related costs (which could only have been finalised with the engagement of a special purpose state enterprise). As a result, we do not expect that the building will be ready until the last quarter of 2025.”

She also referred to arrangements for sharing courtrooms at the Princes Town Court in 2023.

President of the Southern Assembly of Lawyers (ASL) Saira Lakhan also asked for additional measures for San Fernando trials.

She wrote to the Chief Justice on September 16, asking for another court facility at the Princes Town District Court for civil trials.

“This request is necessitated by the unfortunate and continuing closure of the High Court in San Fernando. Further, many litigants and attorneys who have matters which either originated at the High Court at San Fernando or involve parties and subjects which are located in southern Trinidad, have requested in-person trials through their attorneys.

“The closure of the San Fernando High Court continues to have a significant negative impact on the administration of justice for practitioners and litigants in the southern region of TT.

“The San Fernando High Court has traditionally served as a crucial venue for the resolution of a wide range of legal matters, including civil and criminal cases. Its closure continues to cause tremendous inconvenience in the dispensation of justice, which we are all committed to upholding.

“In light of the above, we respectfully propose the utilisation of one of the unused courts in Princes Town District Court.”

She said Princes Town was preferred over the Waterfront Judicial Complex in Port of Spain.

“If this request is facilitated it will greatly assist a multitude of litigants and attorneys in their commute to the Waterfront Judicial Centre for trials in San Fernando matters.

“Moreover, the use of a court in Princes Town would ensure that access to justice remains efficient and effective, and that the rights of all parties are adequately protected.

“We are confident that the judiciary shares our commitment to ensuring that justice is served without undue delay.

“We believe that this interim measure will greatly assist in maintaining the smooth operation of our legal system during this period of transition."

Lakhan asked for an update and offered to meet with the Judiciary to discuss the ASL’s proposal.

In 2023, former ASL president Michael Rooplal complained that attorneys in San Fernando were caught off guard by the temporary closure of the Supreme Court building and the lack of information from the Judiciary. He had written to the Chief Justice asking for an update.

However, in response, the Judiciary singled out only the Newsday’s story on the request and said it had consulted the Law Association (LATT).

The Judiciary said it was surprised by the Newsday article, as it had held discussions on the state of court buildings and the closure of the San Fernando Supreme Court building with LATT, “the statutorily recognised representative body for lawyers in TT.”

Rooplal wrote to LATT asking for clarification on the consultation, since the Judiciary’s statement gave the impression attorneys were not told of the discussions.

In response, he was told the “exchange” between the Judiciary and the LATT on the state of the San Fernando courthouse “cannot be reasonably interpreted as consultation" on the closure of the court .

The association’s president, Lynette Seebaran-Suite, SC, told Rooplal LATT’s senior members had had a meeting with the CJ and his team a month earlier, and among the topics raised were access to justice and the unsatisfactory state of various court buildings.

She said during a general discussion, the association was told the Judiciary was consulting Udecott on the leaking at the San Fernando courthouse and there was an intention to put out tenders for repairs.

She also said in answer to a question about alternative accommodation, the association was told of an intention to use the Princes Town and O’Meara Courts.

But she said, “This exchange cannot be reasonably interpreted as consultation on the closure of the San Fernando Court with LATT, as neither firm plans nor timelines were shared with LATT in advance (or at the meeting) so that we could have formulated a response, including consultation with your good selves.”

Some of the concerns the ASL raised on the last occasion were an update on the expected timeframe for completing the upgrades; how jury trials fixed for hearing would proceed; and how in-person civil trials were expected to take place.

In a second release, dated August 29, 2023,the Judiciary answered some of the questions.

It said judges and lawyers had made enquiries about the use of the Princes Town court building for civil trials.

However, it said there were only five courtrooms there not reserved for Family Court, priority was being given to High Court criminal and district court (magisterial) court matters for in-person hearings, and those rooms were already over-subscribed.

It also said, “If a civil division judge insists on having an in-person hearing or trial, they have been advised to reserve one of the courtrooms in Tower D at the Waterfront Judicial Centre (Port of Spain).”

It also urged virtual hearings where possible, as civil courts have been doing so for over 15 years.

“The Chief Justice has noted that as our physical resources are finite, we have to come to terms with the fact that our personal preferences cannot always be accommodated and has expressed every confidence that reason and good sense will prevail.

“He thanks everyone for their understanding and co-operation. The Chief Justice has also so advised the judges and masters of the civil division accordingly.”

It said every attempt was being made to facilitate the infrastructural upgrade without limiting access to the court building, but it was now necessary to close it for further work.

“Please note that while the court building may be closed, the Judiciary’s ability to utilise e-services will ensure that services continue to be provided to members of the public.

“Additionally, the Supreme Court, San Fernando shall continue hybrid operations to provide service to the public.”

On September 18, Newsday e-mailed the Judiciary for an update on the San Fernando Supreme Court, but there has been no response.