17 Circular Road
Douglas
Isle of Man
IM1 1AF
British Isles

Tel.:
+44 1624 670003
Fax:
+44 1624 612281



contiadvocates
@yahoo.com



Petition of FP Frederiksen & ors

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

The sub-section is silent in relation to Petitions of Doleance in respect of matters in the High Court and indeed Petitions in respect of decisions made by the Attorney General. Perhaps there was no doubt in the minds of members of Tynwald about such matters. In any event, so far as the High Court goes I attempted to put the matter beyond doubt by deciding (page 7 of the Judgment) that "this Court has no power to hear and determine Petitions of Doleance from any decision of a Deemster from any matter in any division of the High Court". There is, however, a very great difference between a review of judicial decisions in the High Court and administrative or executive decisions by non judicial bodies or individuals. Although neither Counsel was able to point me to an example in England or in the Island where the decision of the Attorney General had been subject to judicial review, Mr Morris, having searched in other jurisdictions, produced to the Court a very interesting Judgment of the former Learned Bailiff of Jersey, Sir Peter Crill in the case of McMahon and Probets (1993 JLR 35).

This was an application for an order for certiorari to quash a decision of the Attorney General of Jersey to issue a Notice under the Investigation of Fraud (jersey) Law 1991 Article 2, requesting. information on bank accounts in connection with a criminal investigation, and an adjudication by the Court of the lawfulness of the decision. The relevant part of the Investigation of Fraud (jersey) Law 1991 Article 2 is set out in full at page 40 of the Judgment and this provision is similar to Section 24(1)(2)and (3) of the Act of Tynwald save that the words "or reasonable grounds that" in sub-section 1 are omitted from the Jersey Law. This is a thought-provoking Judgment which requires careful analysis. In the first place the law of judicial review in the states of Jersey and indeed in the Island of Guernsey differs from that in this Island. In Jersey the supervisory powers are similar to those in England. At page 41 Sir Peter Crill stated:-


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

© 1999-2003 Conti. All rights reserved