Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-: Lodging

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 2 October 2012:

Decision Reference: MD-C-2012-0097
Decision Summary Title :	Draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Decision Summary:	28th September 2012
Decision Summary Author:	Project and Research Officer		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	n/a
Written Report Title :	Draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Written Report:	28th September 2012
Written Report Author:	Law Officers Department		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-: Lodge for States debate
Decision(s): The Chief Minister, on the recommendation of the Legislation Advisory Panel, agreed to lodge ‘au Greffe’ the draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201- for States debate at the earliest opportunity.
Reason(s) for Decision: This Projet de Loi contains a short amendment of the Royal Court (Jersey) Law 1948 (“the 1948 Law”). The purpose of the amendment is to enable the Bailiff (of Jersey) to appoint one or more Jurats of the Royal Court of Guernsey to sit as Jurat(s) of the Royal Court of Jersey. At its meeting on 28th September 2012 the Legislation Advisory Panel agreed to recommend to the Chief Minister that he should proceed to lodging ‘au Greffe’ the draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-.
Resource Implications: There are no resource implications for the States other than payment, on the rare occasions when this will arise, for the travel and accommodation of Guernsey Jurats. It is expected these will be met from the standing Court and Case Costs budget of the Judicial Greffe.
Action required: The Greffier of the States to be requested to lodge ‘au Greffe’ the draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201- for States debate at the earliest opportunity.
Signature:		Position: Senator B. I. Le Marquand Deputy Chief Minister
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201-: Lodging

REPORT

This Projet de Loi contains a short amendment of the Royal Court (Jersey) Law 1948 (“the 1948 Law”). The purpose of the amendment is to enable the Bailiff (of Jersey) to appoint one or more Jurats of the Royal Court of Guernsey to sit as Jurat(s) of the Royal Court of Jersey. In general terms, under Article 15(2) of the 1948 Law, in all causes and matters, civil, criminal [1] and mixed, the Jurats are the sole judges of fact and assess the amount of any damages to be awarded.

As the draftsman’s explanatory note states, an appointment of a Guernsey Jurat by the Bailiff in Jersey would be limited to enabling that Jurat to sit in a given case before the Jersey Royal Court. It would not enable him or her to act in any wider judicial capacity in Jersey. Such an appointment would be effective only after consultation with the Bailiff of Guernsey. The Jurat appointed would be required to take an oath of office to the same effect as a Jersey Jurat (although this would not be necessary on a second or subsequent appointment). The Guernsey Jurat would, for the purposes only of the particular case concerned – whether a civil or a criminal case – have all the functions and powers of a Jersey Jurat.

This is a simple but an important amendment. There may be cases in which, for whatever reason it may be, in relation to a cause or matter before the Royal Court, it would be inappropriate for a serving Jurat in the Island to sit. Examples of this might be argued to be where a present Jersey Jurat wanted to bring a claim in damages following a road traffic accident, or was involved in a building dispute or was a material witness as to fact in other proceedings. At present there is no statutory mechanism for the appointment of a person of equivalent office from outside the Island to sit instead. The existence of such a mechanism would be beneficial in helping to ensure, in those cases in which it might be or arguably appear to be in doubt, that justice was being seen to be administered fairly and independently.

Jersey is of course fortunate to have so close at hand a kindred jurisdiction with a Royal Court of similar good calibre to its own. The principles of this draft Law have been the subject of consultation over the last 12 months with the Guernsey Royal Court, and the draft Law has been recommended to the Chief Minister by the Legislation Advisory Panel for lodging.

There are no financial or manpower implications for the States arising from the adoption of this Draft Law, other than the payment, on the rare occasions when this will arise, of travel and hotel costs of Guernsey Jurats who assist in the manner contemplated by these amendments. It is expected these will be met from the standing Court and Case Costs budget of the Judicial Greffe.

European Convention on Human Rights

Article 16 of the Human Rights (Jersey) Law 2000 requires the Minister in charge of a Projet de Loi to make a statement about the compatibility of the provisions of the Projet with the Convention rights (as defined by Article 1 of the Law).

On 2nd October 2012 the Deputy Chief Minister made the following statement before Second Reading of this Projet in the States Assembly –

In the view of the Deputy Chief Minister the provisions of the Draft Royal Court (Amendment No. 13) (Jersey) Law 201- are compatible with the Convention Rights.

[1] other than criminal causes tried before the Criminal Assizes, where there is a jury