Warren Cassell v Registrar of the High Court

• Jurisdiction: Montserrat
• Court: High Court (Montserrat)
• Judge: Stephenson J
• Judgment Date: 03 October 2025
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2025] ECSC J1003-2
• Docket Number: CLAIM NO. MNIHCV 2025/0009

In the Matter of Section 24 of the Legal Profession Act Chapter 02:21

In the Matter of an Application by Warren Cassell seeking the issuance of a Practising Certificate Pursuant to section 24(1) and 24 2(a) of the Legal Profession Act Cap. 02.21

Between:

[1] Warren Cassell

Claimant/Applicant

and

[2] Registrar of the High Court

Defendant/Respondent

[2025] ECSC J1003-2

Before

the Honourable Madam Justice M E Birnie Stephenson (Ag)

CLAIM NO. MNIHCV 2025/0009

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

CIVIL DIVISION

Appearances:

Mr. Warren Cassell in person

Mrs. Sheree Jemmotte-Rodney, Hon. Attorney General for the Respondent

On Written submissions:

1 Stephenson J, [AG.].: “All legal practitioners are required to discharge their professional duties with integrity, probity and complete trustworthiness”. This principle as enunciated by Sir Thomas Bingham MR, in Bolton v Law Society 1 has been described as the over-arching objective, of whether a legal practitioner is a fit and proper person to practice his chosen profession. This remains the cornerstone when consideration is being given to the issue of restoration. See: GMC v Chandra 2. In this case it was held by the UK Court of Appeal that

“The Bolton principles applied equally to doctors as solicitors, and the same principles and approach applied equally to both sanctions and restoration. The question in each case was the same, namely, having regard to the over-arching objective in S1(1B) of the Medical Act 1983 was the doctor/ applicant fit to practise” 3

2 Before the Court is an application by Warren Cassell an attorney at law for an order that the Registrar be directed to issue him a Practising Certificate which will allow him to practice law in the Overseas Territory of Montserrat (“Montserrat”). This application is made pursuant to section 24(1) of the Legal Profession Act. 4 (“the LPA”) A practising certificate is essential to legal practice. It defines the authority, scope and capacity in which an attorney at law can engage in legal practice.

3 The application was brought by Fixed Date Claim with affidavit in support and further affidavit in support sworn to by the applicant with all documents being duly served on the Attorney General in compliance with the LPA. The Attorney General opposes the granting of the application.

4 The respondent to the application has filed two affidavits sworn to by the Registrar Mr Colin Meade in opposition to the application and to provide the court with the relevant information regarding the application. The respondent essentially spoke to an outstanding judgment debt owed by the applicant and to outstanding pending

disciplinary proceedings against the applicant. No substantive evidence has been placed before the court regarding the outstanding disciplinary proceedings,

5 The Registrar averred that the judgment debt against the applicant involves the payment of moneys other than costs and that, the issue of the outstanding judgment has been before the court and Morley J in November 2021 ordered the applicant to make certain payments. Subsequently, a Judgment Debtors Summons was filed and the applicant in the case at bar applied to make a certain monthly payment. No order was made regarding this application as that Judgment Debtors Summons was never heard due to the applicant's (judgment debtor) subsequent unavailability,

6 The Registrar further averred that as it regards this outstanding judgment debt the applicant in his application has failed to provide this court with any evidence regarding his judgment debt.

7 The Registrar disagrees with the applicant's contention that the outstanding judgment debt is irrelevant as he was granted his practising certificate previously 5 whilst the said debt was in existence. It was contended by the Registrar that the Court in that instance, did not make any determination on the relevance of the judgment debt for the purpose of issuing the practising certificate and that the existence of the judgment debt is relevant for the purposes of the application before the Court. 6

8 The Registrar stated that he has been informed and verily believes by Counsel representing the judgment creditor in the proceedings involving the applicant that the applicant has not approached Counsel for the judgment creditor or the judgment creditor personally to address the outstanding judgment debt since he has been at liberty.

9 The Registrar further referred to disciplinary proceedings which are currently pending against the applicant. That the matter of the applicant's continued practice is to be considered pursuant to section 40(5) of the LPA,

10 In compliance with the directions given, the parties filed written submissions, and it was ordered that after those submissions were filed the Court would reserve its decision. The Court also invited the Montserrat Bar Association to make submissions. No submissions were filed by the Bar Association.

11 This is the Court's decision.

12 The applicant was appointed to practice law in the Montserrat in 2000. Thereafter he practiced in Montserrat up until 2022 when he was convicted for the offence of concealing proceeds of crime and sentenced to 2 years and 4 months in prison

13 On the 27th February 2025 the applicant's conviction was quashed and conviction set aside by the Court of Appeal.

14 The applicant was released from His Majesty's Prison in October 2024. By this time the applicant had already served his sentence. The applicant was unable to apply for his annual practising certificate in January 2023 and January 2024 as he was not at liberty.

15 After his appeal was allowed and his conviction quashed the applicant made an application to the registrar of High Court for the issuance of his Practice Certificate and the registrar has not issued same. The applicant therefore made his application to this Court.

16 The practical effect of the application before the court in the case at bar would be to restore the applicant's ability to practice law in Montserrat.

The Legal Professions Act (The LPA)

17 The LPA makes provision for the regulation of the legal profession for the qualification, enrolment and discipline of its members and for related matters 7.

18 Pursuant to section 21(1)(b) of the LPA all attorneys at law/lawyers called to and practicing at the bar in Montserrat are required to hold a valid practicing certificate.

19 Section 24 of the LPA makes provision for the “Issue or refusal of practising certificate” Section

24(1) states

“An attomey-at-law who applies for a practising certificate and falls within subsection (2) must give to the Registrar at least four weeks' notice, any shorter period that the Court may permit, of his intention to make the application to the Court and the Court may in its discretion order the Registrar to—

(a) issue or refuse the application; or

(b) issue a practising certificate to the applicant subject to terms and conditions as it may think fit.”

20 The application at bar based on the evidence adduced, falls to be considered under section 24(2) (a) and (i). These subsections read as follows:

“Subsection (1) applies to an attomey-at-law who makes an application for a practising certificate if—

(a) he has ceased to hold a valid practising certificate for twelve months or more;

…

(i) there is a judgment against him that involves the payment of moneys other than costs (excluding a judgment whose whole effect is that he is entitled to indemnity or relief from any other person), and he has not produced evidence that the judgment has been satisfied;…”

21 The LPA gives the court a discretion to order the Registrar to issue the Practising Certificate as sought by the applicant herein. It is also within the Court's discretion to impose such terms and conditions as it thinks fit 8. This discretion “… is not unfettered, it must be exercised judicially, with reference to the public interest, the integrity of the profession and the particular facts of the case.” 9

22 It is to be noted also that lawyers are required to apply annually for the Practising Certificate which clearly means that yearly, consideration is to be given to the lawyer's fitness to practice. It is not meant to be an automatic renewal.

Section 24(2)(a)

23 The last time the applicant would have held a Practising Certificate was in 2022. This would mean that the applicant ceased to hold a valid a Practising Certificate for twelve

months or more. Pursuant to section 2A(2)(a) of the LP A, an attorney at law who has ceased to hold a valid practising certificate for twelve months or more is required to apply to the Court on notice to the Registrar for a Practising Certificate. Mr Cassell quite correctly premised his application on section 24 (2)(a) as having not held a certificate for twelve months or more and he did provide and explanation for that situation,

Section 24 (2)(i)

24 The Attorney General representing the Registrar of the Supreme Court referred this court to section 24 (2)(i) as quoted above. The submission was made regarding the outstanding judgment debt owed by the applicant. The outstanding judgment debt against Mr Cassell is of concern to this court.

25 The Attorney General in her submissions urged this court to assess the nature of the outstanding judgment against the applicant and the impact on the legal profession. The Attorney General cited an relied on the case of Ahmad v Bar Standards Board 10 and she submitted that due to the applicant's outstanding judgment debt, the applicant was required by section 24(2)(i) of the LPA to make application to the court for the granting of his practice certificate.

26 In Ahmad, the court was called on to consider the situation where Ahmad failed to comply with the terms of a court order to pay a judgment debt. The court upheld the sanction imposed by the Disciplinary Tribunal. The Tribunal was of the view...