 |
| The Nehru style suit is considered formal wear. It was made famous by the late Indian PM Jawarharlal Nehru |
The magistrate made the ruling in respect of Senior Counsel Israel Khan who appeared before him to defend in client. Khan was at the time wearing a Nehru suit designed and made by a local tailor.
McNicholls ordered Khan to be properly attired in suit and tie. The attorney complied in order to continue the defence of his client. However he filed for judicial review of the decision.
advised that the "proper authorities" take the necessary steps to prescribe the type of dress for all attorneys on the proper wear for Magistrates' Court.
The High Court upheld the decision by McNicolls, stating that the magistrate was right since the traditional outfit for male lawyers. Khan appealed.
On Friday the Appeal Court made its decision.
The High Court upheld the decision by McNicolls, stating that the magistrate was right since the traditional outfit for male lawyers. Khan appealed.
On Friday the Appeal Court made its decision.
Deputy Chief State Solicitor Neil Byam told the court that McNicolls based his decision on the convention for dress that excludes the Nehru suit.
However, the Appeal Court pointed out that female attorneys wear hijabs and that the convention in the past did not allow them to wear pants.
"Look at female attorneys— we know they wear pants, skirts etc. What is the convention of women? Suppose a female practitioner came to court with a skirt too short or neckline too deep. Is it just about the colour and suit?" Justice Peter Jamadar asked.
Byam sidestepped the matter, advising that he was there to deal with the Khan matter alone and suggested that the Law Association deal with the matter raised by Jamadhar.
Jamadar asked Byam whether McNicolls ought to have consulted with the Law Association before arriving at a decision to which Byam responded: "A serious enquiry was taking place and it would have been unfortunate to interrupt it and launch an enquiry into the matter."
Justice Rajendra Narine told Byam that conventions change with time and McNicholls should not have based his judgement on a static interpretation of convention. "It is not written in stone. As society changes, so does convention," Narine said.
However, the Appeal Court pointed out that female attorneys wear hijabs and that the convention in the past did not allow them to wear pants.
"Look at female attorneys— we know they wear pants, skirts etc. What is the convention of women? Suppose a female practitioner came to court with a skirt too short or neckline too deep. Is it just about the colour and suit?" Justice Peter Jamadar asked.
Byam sidestepped the matter, advising that he was there to deal with the Khan matter alone and suggested that the Law Association deal with the matter raised by Jamadhar.
Jamadar asked Byam whether McNicolls ought to have consulted with the Law Association before arriving at a decision to which Byam responded: "A serious enquiry was taking place and it would have been unfortunate to interrupt it and launch an enquiry into the matter."
Justice Rajendra Narine told Byam that conventions change with time and McNicholls should not have based his judgement on a static interpretation of convention. "It is not written in stone. As society changes, so does convention," Narine said.
The third judge, Allan Mendonca, delivered the ruling stating that McNicolls was irrational since he did not give a reason for his conclusion.
The judge said McNicolls did not properly consider the full clothing Khan wore. He added that there is no single style or mode of dress since there is a variety.
Mendonca said the decision by McNicolls was flawed and advised that the three-member appeal panel decided to quash the ruling.
Khan was elated with the decision. "It is a victory for my free spirit because the Nehru suit is sophisticated...This is a fight for the past six years and it is a victory for Indo-Trinidadians," he told local media.
President of the T&T Law Association, Dana Seetahal,SC, said the judges raised a good point "since right now there is no code of dress for attorneys at the Magistrates' Court, but there is one at the High Court."
No comments:
Post a Comment