The Appellate Jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice

British Colonies ◽

Various Caribbean countries have established the Caribbean Court of Justice, and have taken steps to ensure its viability. The Court has two jurisdictions. One of these—the Original Jurisdiction—pertains to disputes arising under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, the constituent treaty of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy. The other jurisdiction—the Appellate Jurisdiction—was intended from the outset to allow the Caribbean Court of Justice to serve as the final court of appeal for all Caribbean countries. The Appellate Jurisdiction, which forms the basis of this chapter, has been the subject of considerable debate. To date, only four Caribbean countries—Barbados, Guyana, Belize and Dominica—have entrusted their final appeals to the new court, with most former British colonies in the region retaining the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for final appeals. What have been the main elements in the long and circuitous debate concerning the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court? Why have some Caribbean States opted to retain appeals to the Privy Council? And what are the prospects concerning the Appellate Jurisdiction? The chapter considers these issues in light of the passage of more than a decade and a half since Caribbean States signed the Agreement Establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice.

Advisory Opinion of the Caribbean Court of Justice in Response to a Request from the Caribbean Community (Caribbean Ct. J.)

International Legal Materials ◽

10.1017/ilm.2020.40 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 59 (4) ◽

pp. 708-738

Author(s):

Stephen Vasciannie

Keyword(s):

Advisory Opinion ◽

Privy Council ◽

Applicable Law ◽

Caribbean Community ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

Municipal Law ◽

The Caribbean ◽

British Colonies ◽

An Appellate Jurisdiction, which addresses municipal law cases on appeal from countries which accept this jurisdiction. To date, four Caribbean countries—Barbados, Guyana, Belize and Dominica—have accepted the appellate jurisdiction of the Court. The applicable law for each case under the appellate jurisdiction is the national law of the state from which the appeal emanates. The CCJ in its Appellate Jurisdiction is intended to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the final court of appeal for Caribbean countries which were formerly British colonies.

The Caribbean Court of Justice

10.1093/oso/9780198795582.003.0007 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Salvatore Caserta ◽

Mikael Rask Madsen

Keyword(s):

Privy Council ◽

Criminal Cases ◽

Community Law ◽

Caribbean Community ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

Sociopolitical Context ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Criminal Matters ◽

This chapter analyzes the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the creation of which was regarded as the culmination of the Caribbean’s long and protracted process toward independence from its former colonizers. Formally, the CCJ was instantaneously empowered to hear cases involving Caribbean Community law (Community law). The CCJ was also empowered to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) in London—a last court of appeal for civil and criminal cases from the Caribbean and the most visible remnant of the British Empire’s former rule. The CCJ’s unique double jurisdiction—original over Community law and appellate over other civil and criminal matters—underscores the complex sociopolitical context and transformation of which it is a part. Ultimately, the CCJ’s growing authority has increasingly made the Court the institutional intersection for the convergence of these two different paths toward establishing the Caribbean as a legally integrated regional unity.

The Caribbean Court of Justice: A New Judicial Experience

International Journal of Legal Information ◽

10.1017/s0731126500005229 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 37 (2) ◽

pp. 219-238 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Désirée P. Bernard

Keyword(s):

Legal Profession ◽

Caribbean Region ◽

Privy Council ◽

Appellate Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Commonwealth Caribbean ◽

The inauguration of the Caribbean Court of Justice in April 2005 represented the culmination of aspirations in earlier years to establish a court of last resort for the Caribbean Region to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (The Privy Council) which was and still is for most Commonwealth Caribbean jurisdictions, the final court. These aspirations were endorsed by the legal profession through the Organisation of Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Associations (OCCBA) over thirty years ago, although the idea of such a court was not an original one having been contemplated early in the last century. The court was envisaged as a Caribbean Court of Appeal with an appellate jurisdiction hearing appeals from domestic appellate courts and an original jurisdiction to interpret regional treaties.

The Extended Foundation of the Caribbean Court of Justice between Decolonisation and Globalisation

International Courts in Latin America and the Caribbean ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198867999.003.0002 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 25-64

Author(s):

Salvatore Caserta

Keyword(s):

Death Penalty ◽

Judicial System ◽

The Other ◽

Window Of Opportunity ◽

Privy Council ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

British West Indian ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Caribbean Court Of Justice

This chapter deals with the extended process of creation of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) arguing that, different from what often stated in the literature, the Court is the institutional crystallisation of two long-enduring movements within the Caribbean legal field. One of these two movements is linked to the development of early regionalism, and ties into the Court’s origins as a regional economic institution aimed at reviving the Caribbean Common Market (CARICOM). The other is a movement related to the long-lasting process of Caribbean decolonisation from the United Kingdom, as the CCJ is also intended to be a regional Supreme Court to replace the Privy Council as the apex court of the former British West Indian colonies. The chapter also analyses the window of opportunity leading to the creation of the Court, most notably the clash between different generations of Caribbean legal elites and their own respective disagreements with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on death penalty issues and, more generally, on how to handle the judicial system of the Caribbean countries.

The Interpretation of Commonwealth Caribbean Constitutions

The Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Constitutions ◽

10.1093/law/9780198793045.003.0021 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 554-581

Author(s):

Derek O’Brien

Keyword(s):

Public Participation ◽

Holistic Approach ◽

Conservative Approach ◽

Privy Council ◽

Constitutional Order ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Commonwealth Caribbean ◽

Interpretive Process

This chapter focuses on the differing approaches of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the Caribbean Court of Justice towards the interpretation of the independence Constitutions of the Commonwealth Caribbean. Critiquing the lack of autochthony and the lack of meaningful public participation in the drafting of the region’s independence Constitutions, a number of influential Caribbean constitutional scholars have advocated a much more judicially creative approach to the interpretation of the region’s constitutions than the more conservative approach that has dominated the JCPC’s more recent jurisprudence. I call the approach advocated by these scholars the holistic approach because it treats the constitution as a whole as greater than the sum of its parts. The Caribbean Court of Justice in two recent judgments on appeals from Barbados and Guyana respectively has now adopted this approach. Notwithstanding its undoubted attraction in terms of resolving some of the deficiencies and flaws in the region’s independence Constitutions, it will be argued that the holistic approach risks undermining not only the whole interpretive process, but also the whole constitutional order.

Show Me the Money: Enforcing Original Jurisdiction Judgments of the Caribbean Court of Justice

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156515000679 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 29 (1) ◽

pp. 113-135 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

RIA MOHAMMED-DAVIDSON

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Common Law ◽

Single Market ◽

The State ◽

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

Domestic Courts ◽

The Caribbean ◽

New York Convention

AbstractThis article examines the challenges surrounding the enforcement of decisions of international courts, using the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the fulcrum of the analysis. When sitting in its original jurisdiction, the CCJ adjudicates claims arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and the operation of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy. However, there is no clear route for the enforcement of original jurisdiction decisions. The Agreement Establishing the CCJ leaves the issue of enforcement to the states themselves, who in turn have either failed to enact enforcement legislation or have provided for enforcement to be carried out ‘in like manner’ as the decisions of domestic courts. This phraseology raises the spectre of the Crown Proceedings Act and its legislative progeny which bar the pursuit of enforcement proceedings against the state. Several solutions to this enforcement conundrum are discussed, ranging from a regional enforcement treaty, akin to the New York Convention, to enforcement at common law using the Fick case, with the merits and demerits of each examined in turn.

A COMMENTARY ON THE EARLY DECISIONS OF THE CARIBBEAN COURT OF JUSTICE IN ITS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589310000291 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 59 (3) ◽

pp. 761-778

Author(s):

Adrian D Saunders

Keyword(s):

The Bahamas ◽

Caribbean Community ◽

Anglophone Caribbean ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

English Speaking ◽

The Caribbean ◽

1960S And 1970S ◽

The 1960S ◽

British Colonies

The Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (‘the RTC’) is an attempt on the part of a group of Caribbean States to respond in a collective manner to the pressing challenges posed by the forces of globalization and liberalization. The RTC seeks, inter alia, to deepen regional economic integration through the establishment of a Caribbean Community (‘CARICOM’) including a CARICOM Single Market and Economy (‘CSME’). The States in question—Antigua & Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname and Trinidad & Tobago—are for the most part former British colonies that gained their independence in the 1960s and 1970s. The RTC signals yet another important step in the tortuous path taken by these Anglophone Caribbean States ‘to avoid the looming threat of marginalization’1 following the failure in 1962 of the West Indies Federation.2 Significantly, this latest step is being taken side by side with the non English speaking civil law States of Haiti and Suriname thereby adding a new and interesting dimension to the integration process.

CARICOM and its Court of Justice

Common Law World Review ◽

10.1350/clwr.2008.37.4.0177 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 37 (4) ◽

pp. 334-355 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Derek O'Brien ◽

S. Foadi

Keyword(s):

Regional Integration ◽

Institutional Structure ◽

Single Market ◽

Caribbean Community ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Caribbean Court Of Justice

The Caribbean Court of Justice, which was inaugurated in April 2005, is possessed of both an appellate and an original jurisdiction. In its original jurisdiction the Court is vested with a compulsory and exclusive power to interpret and apply the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which establishes the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Single Market and Economy. This paper explores the Court's original jurisdiction and the role that it could play in promoting regional integration, taking account of the region's history and the institutional structure within which it will be expected to function.

RESILIENCE TECHNIQUES OF INTERNATIONAL COURTS IN TIMES OF RESISTANCE TO INTERNATIONAL LAW

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589321000154 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-32

Author(s):

Salvatore Caserta ◽

Pola Cebulak

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

International Law ◽

Land Rights ◽

Analytical Framework ◽

The European Union ◽

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

Indigenous Groups ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Caribbean Court Of Justice

Abstract International courts are increasingly called upon to adjudicate socially divisive disputes. They are therefore exposed to a heightened risk of backlash that questions their authority and impedes the implementation of their judgments. This article puts forward an analytical framework for mapping the resilience techniques used by international courts to counter this growing resistance. Case studies involve the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has been cautious in its stance regarding democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland, and the Caribbean Court of Justice, which has engaged in legal diplomacy while adjudicating both on the land rights of indigenous groups and on Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer and Intersex (LGBTQI) rights. It is argued that, in order to effectively avoid and mitigate backlash, international courts should deploy resilience techniques that go beyond merely exercising their judicial function. The successful deployment of resilience techniques can allow international courts to become significant actors in global governance during a time of crisis for the international liberal order.

International Courts in Latin America and the Caribbean

10.1093/oso/9780198867999.001.0001 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Salvatore Caserta

Keyword(s):

Latin American ◽

Decisive Role ◽

Fundamental Rights ◽

Science Literature ◽

Regional Politics ◽

Regional Economic ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

The Caribbean ◽

Latin American And Caribbean

The book provides the first in-depth and empirically grounded analysis on the foundations and trajectories of gaining authority of the four Latin American and Caribbean regional economic courts: the Central American Court of Justice (CACJ), the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), and the Mercosur Permanent Review Court (PRC). While these courts were, on their terms, established to build common markets and to enforce trade liberalization, they have often developed bodies of jurisprudence in domains often not directly associated with regional economic integration. The CCJ has been most successful in the area of human and fundamental rights; the CACJ has addressed issues related to the enforcement of the rule of law in national legal arenas and long-standing border disputes between the countries of the region; the ATJ is an island of effective adjudication on intellectual property issues; and the PRC has significantly struggled to receive a significant number of cases to rule upon all together. The particular trajectories of the four Latin American and Caribbean Regional Economic Courts (RECs) suggest that there is no universal formula for success for these institutions and that their operational path is not necessarily a function of their formally delegated competences and/or of the will of the Member States, as it is often argued in mainstream legal and political science literature. Rather, local socio-political contextual factors—such as the historical legacies of a region, the interests and dynamics of socialization of legally and politically situated actors, the nature of national and regional politics, and legal culture—often play a far more decisive role in influencing the direction of RECs during and after their establishment.