THE TURKS & CAICOS ISLANDS Law and Practice Contributed by: Stephen Wilson KC, Dominique Gardiner and Lovelie Luxama, Wilson Wells
7.3 Jury Trials in Civil Cases Pursuant to Section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 4.01) (CPA), in every action the mode of trial shall be by a judge without a jury, unless under the provisions of that Act a trial with a jury is ordered or either party has given notice of demand for a jury. An order for trial by jury in civil cases is rarely made, albeit technically still available to the parties. In considering whether to order a trial of any action without a jury, the court will take into account whether the action, matter or issue requires any prolonged examination of documents or accounts, or any scientific or local investigation, which cannot in its opinion conveniently be tried with a jury. 7.4 Rules That Govern Admission of Evidence The Evidence Act (Chapter 2.06), the Evidence (Spe- cial Provisions) Act (Chapter 2.07) and Order 38 of the Rules of the Supreme Court provide a framework in respect of the admissibility of evidence at trial and the procedure in connection with the use of evidence. In summary, most evidence can be admissible, although the weight given to it may be negligible depending on the circumstances. The court will not admit prejudicial evidence where to do so is unfair to the other party. To that extent, hearsay evidence is divided into different classes and can usually be adduced by the service of requisite notice and coun- ter-notice. As far as practicable, all questions con- cerning the giving of hearsay evidence should be dealt with and disposed of before the trial. Ultimately, however, it would remain at the discretion of the court whether to allow such evidence if it does arise at the trial. 7.5 Expert Testimony Expert testimony is permitted at trial, subject to the court ruling that the relevant witness is qualified as (and accepted as) an expert. Experts’ reports are required to be exchanged well in advance of the trial, and experts are encouraged to meet with a view to determining what they can agree on and what mat- ters they differ on. The number of experts a party can call, and the experts’ respective disciplines, are deter- mined at a directions hearing.
7.6 Extent to Which Hearings Are Open to the Public As stated in 1.3 Court Filings and Proceedings , the general rule is that hearings of trials are open to the public; however, there are circumstances in which a civil action may be held in camera and the public excluded. The test is whether public access would defeat the ends of justice, such as in cases where particulars of a secret process must be disclosed. An application for the trial to be heard in camera because of privileged and confidential information that may arise in the evidence can be denied if the court, in the course of exercising its inherent jurisdiction, forms the view that the case is of fundamental importance and should be held in public. The court may give direc- tions with a view to avoiding unnecessary reference to information that could be commercially damaging and where there would be no interference with the presentation of the case. It is only recently that proceedings before the Supreme Court have started to be recorded and more recently that the court produces transcripts. 7.7 Level of Intervention by a Judge Judges can, and usually do, intervene where it is appropriate; however, the level of intervention differs from judge to judge. A judge may feel it appropri- ate in certain circumstances to raise questions and issues with counsel for the parties in chambers, in the absence of any witness giving evidence and/or the parties themselves. Judges often indicate which way they are thinking in terms of an issue, while making it clear they have not made a final decision on the issue. When witnesses are being questioned, judges some- times intervene to ensure that they fully understand the evidence that is being given or where there has been an omission of evidence relating to facts that are relevant to the determination of the case. Decisions and orders are far more likely to be given or made at the hearing of an interlocutory applica- tion. However, where the application involves detailed argument (particularly on the law), decisions will gen- erally be reserved. Judgments following trials are usually reserved, although sometimes judges of the Supreme Court and the justices of appeal sitting in
1135 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook