Judicial review - Legitimate expectation - Government’s policy for computation of salaries of legal officers - Policy linking legal officers’ salaries to judges’ salaries - Change of policy by government - Legislation effecting change in policy - No notification to legal officers - No consultation before change effected - Breach of legal officers’ legitimate expectation - Whether breach of legitimate expectation justified - Whether legitimate expectation overridden by legislation - Appropriateness of case for judicial review - Whether alternative remedy exists - Whether declaratory relief a

Civil Procedure - Application for summary judgment - Civil Procedure Rules15.4 (4).

“Taxation of Costs – Clients and Attorneys costs – S. 22 of The Legal Profession Act – Rule 65 of Civil Procedure Rules 2002

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

IN THE CIVIL DIVISION

CLAIM IVO. MCV200412993

IN CHAMBERS

BETWEEN

AND

PETROLEUM COMPANY OF JAMAICA APPLICANT

LIMITED

ERIC SANDERMAN

(trading as Eric G. Sanderman) RESPONDENT

Miss Alicia Thomas instructed by K. Churchill Neita and Company for the Applicant.

Mr. Harold Brady instrl~ctedb y Brady and Company for the respondent.

Heard: December 20,21, and 29,2004

Coram: KING J

Medical negligence - Application of the doctrine of Res Ipsa Liquitor

Contested application for leave to apply for judicial review – whether governments right to change its policy can be fettered by Legitimate Expectation arising from its previous promise or conduct – Right to be heard.

Judicial review – whether subpoena for DPP to testify should be set aside – whether motive for subpoena improper-whether DPP can give relevant evidence – effect of section 94 (6) of Constitution