2001/10A
2 pages
ROYAL COURT
(Samedi Division)
12th January, 2001
Before: M.C. St.J Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff; and
Jurats Myles, and Allo.
Representation of Barrie Raymond Cooper, made ex parte, seeking an Order suspending the Warrant of Appointment of the Lieutenant Governor designate.
The Representor on his own behalf
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. Mr Barrie Cooper has presented a representation to the Court which reads as follows:-
"To the President, Jurats and Officers of the Royal Court. The representation of Barrie Raymond Cooper shows that:-
That certain constitutional anomalies exist in the office of the Lieutenant Governor that appear as non-compatible with the principles laid down by the European Convention on Human Rights that binds the Crown and appointees, through the Order of Her Majesty in Council as dated 17th May 2000 and referred to by letter dated 10th August 2000 from Balmoral Castle, to which a response remains outstanding.
The Representor submits that the aforesaid anomalies should be subjected to an independent and impartial investigation and effectively resolved by referral to the Judicial Committee of Her Majesty's Privy Council as a Court of constitutional jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Court is entreated to invoke Article 15 of the Royal Court (Jersey) Law, 1948 (Registration of Orders, Warrants and Letters) to suspend the Warrant of appointment of the Lieutenant Governor designate, until such time as the anomalies of that office and others connected are rectified and Her Majesty be so advised thereon."
2. We have given careful consideration to this representation and to the points which Mr Cooper has made orally today in support of them but have concluded that the representation must be dismissed on two grounds.
3. First, Mr Cooper has no locus standi, in other words - to use the English - he has no standing to bring this claim. He is an ordinary member of the public and it is not open to a member of the public to bring a claim such as this, which relates to a public appointment by the Crown. That can only be done by the Attorney General acting in the public interest as partie publique. A person has standing in such a matter only if he has suffered particular, direct or substantial damage over and above any alleged damage suffered by the public at large. The representation contains no assertion to that effect.
4. Secondly, it would be an abuse of the process of the Royal Court to allow the representation to proceed because it discloses no arguable ground for relief on the face of the document. All that the representation says is that "certain constitutional anomalies" exist in the office of the Lieutenant Governor and that they are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. It goes on to ask for an independent and impartial inquiry. This is a vague allegation and we have to say that the representation does not disclose any legal cause of action, in other words, any cause of action or any allegation of facts which give right to legal recourse. In the circumstances, having considered the matter carefully, the Court is compelled to dismiss the representation.
No Authorities.