Search

Judicial review is the procedure by which municipal courts intervene in the affairs of public bodies to review the process by which they have arrived at decisions which adversely affect their constituents. In this connection, the decisions of public bodies may be challenged on the basis that they were arrived at in error of law, tainted by error of fact or bias, irrational, disproportionate or in breach of principles of natural justice. Although in some jurisdictions sporting bodies are amenable to judicial review, courts in England and Wales and, indeed, the Commonwealth Caribbean, have been largely consistent in finding that because of their private and largely contractual nature, their decisions are not susceptible to judicial review. This article argues that in light of the recent Court of Appeal decision of Trinidad and Tobago Football Association v FIFA, the death knell has effectively been sounded for the judicial review of sporting bodies, such that the view of Michael Beloff, Tim Kerr and Marie Demetriou in their 2012 book, Sports Law, that ‘it is not clear that the last word has been said on the subject’, has now been put to rest, at least in the Commonwealth Caribbean. Notwithstanding its recognition of the importance of the Court of Appeal’s decision in clarifying the scope of judicial review in sporting cases, this article nonetheless contends that FIFA’s sweeping Statutes, its increasingly frequent installation of Normalization Committees and its imposition of heavily punitive sanctions against allegedly recalcitrant constituent sporting federations represent legal imperialism and supranational exceptionalism.

The Covid-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc on Caribbean countries. These countries have lost billions of dollars in foreign capital. Although the region's peoples are currently being vaccinated, the damage already caused by Covid-19 remains immeasurable and will likely continue for many years. Irrespective of whether vaccination results in herd immunity, Caribbean countries not only face the unenviable challenge of recalibrating their economies post-Covid-19, but also the prospect of being hauled before arbitral tribunals in respect of claims brought by investors alleging breaches of investor protection standards as a result of measures taken in response to the pandemic. To the extent that there is a real risk of claims of this nature arising in future, this article contends that Covid-19, as an unprecedented event, exposes the asymmetrical nature of the international investment regime, and its inability to fully countenance the domestic realities of developing countries that are confronted with existential threats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines the recently decided Canadian striking out application of SCC 5, a case in which the Supreme Court of Canada held, in a 5–4 decision, that a private corporation may be liable ...

Although sport, in its myriad forms, represent a major pillar of Caribbean societies, sports broadcasters have suffered tremendous loss over the years as a result of signal piracy. With the increasing recognition of the value of broadcast rights in generating much-needed revenue, and the commensurate increased awareness among broadcasters as to how the law may protect these rights, sports broadcasters in the Caribbean have, in the recent years, become a lot more adversarial in their dealings with infringers of their copyright in broadcasts. This has culminated in a recent decision, Television Jamaica v CVM, in which a Caribbean superior court has, for the first time, delivered a landmark judgment on the scope of copyright protection in sports broadcasts. The decision is timely, well-reasoned and progressive, and address a number of nuanced questions, which previously remained unanswered. By drawing on regional copyright legislation, jurisprudence from other jurisdictions, and the recently decided TVJ v CVM case, this article argues that, for the first time, broadcasters in the Caribbean are afforded an adequate and effective level of protection against infringement of their broadcasts, albeit that they cannot claim a monopoly in said broadcasts, since the fair dealing defence has been construed as balancing the rights and interests of competing stakeholders in the field of sport.

This chapter aims to provide an authoritative account of Guyana’s intriguing constitutional history and modern constitutional landscape. It provides a unique analysis of Guyana’s constitutional antecedents, and presents a critical narrative of the nuanced features of its socialist constitution. More particularly, the chapter demonstrates how the exceptional powers of the Executive President and the uneasy relationship between the Legislature and the Executive have dominated Guyana’s recent constitutional affairs, and the impact that these developments have had on democratic accountability in that country. It also critically addresses the human rights dimensions of Guyana’s constitutional landscape, and, argues that there exists a piecemeal approach to the protection of some of the more contested constitutional rights in Guyana. Ultimately, the chapter contends that the while Guyana holds a unique place in regional constitutionalism, given its distinct constitutional antecedents and existing normative prescriptions, constitutional reform is long overdue.

(2014). The Transplantation of the European Principle of ‘State Liability’ in Caribbean Community (Caricom) Law: A Normative Assessment. Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal: Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 73-104.

The statutory framework governing the protection afforded various copyright subject matter in the UK, despite the predictability afforded by its closed list, has come under intense criticism over the last decade or so, with many scholars citing the need for urgent reform. Indeed, given the adverse range of responses in this regard, the question arises as to whether the UK should move towards a system that more closely resembles that of other Commonwealth Countries, such as Canada and Trinidad and Tobago, where a non-exhaustive or open list of protected works is provided for.