Facey Commodity Co. Ltd., et al v Joseph Jarrett

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

IN THE CIVIL DIVISION

CLAIM NO HCV 00705 OF 2007

BETWEEN FACEY COMMOI>ITY COMPANY LTD FIRST CLAIMANT

AND MUSSON (JAMAICA) LIMITED SECOND CLAIMANT 1

AND STANLEY Moll-A LIMITED THIRD CLAIMANT 1

AND

AND

PRODUCTIVE BIJSINESS

SOLUTIONS LIMITED

FOURTH CLAIMANT ~

JOSEPH JARRE'T (T/A JOSEPH DEFENDANT

JARRETT & COMPANY ATTORNEYS-ATLAW)

IN CHAMBERS

John Vassell Q.C. and Courtney Bailey instructed by DunnCox for the claimants

Joseph Jarrett in person

February 26, 27, March 1 and 16, 2007

APPLICATION TO VARY FREEZING ORDER, APPLICATION TO DISCHARGE

FREEZING ORDER, FIDUCIAI;,Y DUTY, SECTION 21 OF THE LEGAL

PROFESSION ACT

SYKES J.

1 .At the end of three days of dealing with this matter, the area of dispute between

the parties has been narrowed considerably as far as this particular claim is

concerned. I am restricting myself 1.0 the barest minimum of facts because there is

still a trial to come in this matter ~ nadlso a related claim filed by Mr. Jarrett in

which he is alleging, among other things, that he was wrongfully or constructively

dismissed (HCV 00291/2007). Even with this reservation, it is difficult to see how

Mr. Jarrett can successfully resist the declarations sought in paragraphs one and

two of the claim (set out below) agclinst him in light of the admissions made during

the hearing. It would seem to me also that Mr. Jarrett is going to have grave

difficulty resisting paragraph 3 of the claim. I say this because, as Mr. Vassell Q.C.

pointed out, section 21 of the Legal Profession Act now regulates how disputes

relating to fees owing between an a*-torney at law and his client are to be resolved.

The statute does not contemplate the self help remedy embarked on by Mr.

Jarrett.