{"kind":"expression","expression":{"expr_id":"2015","doc_id":"2015","label":"Cayman Islands Identification Card Act, 2022","is_as_enacted":"f","commenced_on":null,"superseded_on":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_to":null,"is_current":"t","incorporating":null,"akn_expr_iri":"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01","akn_envelope":"{\"_canary\": {\"iri\": {\"work\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\", \"expression\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01\", \"manifestation\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01.pdf\"}, \"pdf\": {\"md5\": \"b03774191ff6d41106e721771a81accd\", \"path\": \"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.pdf\", \"pages\": 11, \"filename\": \"2022-0015.pdf\"}, \"errors\": [], \"extraction\": {\"model\": null, \"stats\": {\"word_count\": 3593, \"paragraph_count\": 73, \"text_char_count\": 21498}, \"usage\": null, \"method\": \"pymupdf-text\", \"version\": \"kyleg-akn-1.0\", \"extracted_at\": \"2026-06-22\"}, \"classification\": \"text_layer\", \"validation_flags\": [], \"docai_processor_id\": null}, \"akomaNtoso\": {\"act\": {\"body\": [{\"eId\": \"sec_n1\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"PRACTICE DIRECTIONON LISTINGS AND CUSTODY\\nTIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS\\n(PD 1 of 2022)\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n2\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \".\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n3\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 2 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n4\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2022\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n5\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"PRACTICE DIRECTION ON LISTINGS AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN\\nCRIMINAL MATTERS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n6\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Judicial Listing Officers\u2019 responsibility and key principles\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n7\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Much of this Direction is based upon the English Criminal Practice Direction 2015 and it must\\nbe read in conjunction with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 5\\nof 2015 (Criminal Case Management in the Summary Court).\\nListing as a judicial responsibility and function\\nA1.\\nListing is both a judicial and administrative function. The purpose is to ensure that all cases\\nare brought to a hearing or trial in accordance with the interests of justice, that the resources\\navailable for criminal justice are deployed as effectively as possible, and that cases are\\nheard by an appropriate judicial officer or bench with the minimum of delay.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n8\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"(a) The Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate, in consultation with the Listing Officer and\\nCase Progression Offices respectively of the Grand and the Summary Court (CPO)\\nshall have the overall responsibility for approving the weekly list of all Grand Court\\nand Summary Court matters, respectively. The Chief Justice will assign day to day\\nresponsibility to the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Divisions for the listing of\\ncriminal cases.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n9\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"(b) The Listing Officer and the CPO respectively of the Grand Court and Summary Courts\\nis responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operation of listing practice under the\\ndirection of the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate. The Listing Officer\/CPO has one\\nof the most important functions at the Courts and makes a vital contribution to the\\nefficient running of Court and to the efficient operation of the administration of criminal\\njustice;\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n10\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"(c) In the Grand Court, the CPO, subject to the daily supervision of the Judge responsible\\nfor the Criminal Division, is responsible for liaising with the Listing Officer to settle\\nthe list of Grand Court criminal hearings and trials. To this end the CPO and the Listing\\nOfficer shall meet every week on Thursday to settle the List of criminal cases for the\\nensuing week.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n11\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"(d) In the Summary Courts, the CPO, subject to the supervision of the Chief Magistrate, is\\nresponsible for administering the listing practice. The day-to-day setting of that listing\\npractice is the responsibility of the Chief Magistrate in consultation with the Magistrates\\nand with the assistance of the CPO.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n12\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 3 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n13\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Key principles of listing\\nA2.\\nWhen approving the lists, the Chief Justice [or the assigned Judge] and Chief Magistrate\\nrespectively will take into account the following principles:\\n(a)\\nEnsure the timely trial of cases and resolution of other issues (such as confiscation)\\nso that justice is not delayed. The following factors are relevant:\\ni.\\nIn general, each case should be tried within as short a time of its arrival in the\\nCourt as is consistent with the interests of justice, the needs of victims and\\nwitnesses, and with the proper and timely preparation by the prosecution and\\ndefence of their cases in accordance with the directions and timetable set;\\nii.\\nPriority should be accorded to the trial of young defendants, and cases where\\nthere are vulnerable or young witnesses. In R v Barker [2010] WWCA Crim 4,\\nthe Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales highlighted \u201cthe importance to the\\ntrial and investigative process of keeping any delay in a case involving a child\\ncomplainant to an irreducible minimum\u201d;\\niii.\\nCustody time limits imposed by the Constitution, the Police Act or habeas\\ncorpus principles should be observed;\\niv.\\nEvery effort must be made to avoid delay including in cases in which the\\ndefendant is on bail;\\n(b)\\nEnsure that in the Summary Courts, unless impracticable , non-custody anticipated\\nguilty plea cases are listed no longer than 14 days after a charge is filed with the Court\\n, and non-custody anticipated not guilty pleas are listed no longer than 28 days after\\na charge is filed [See also in this regard, the provisions of paragraph 13.4 \u2013 13.6 of\\nPractice Direction No. 5 of 2015];\\n(c)\\nProvide, when possible, for certainty and\/or as much advance notice as possible, of\\nthe trial date; and take all reasonable steps to ensure that the trial date remains fixed:\\n(d)\\nEnsure that a Judge or Magistrate (with any necessary authorization and of\\nappropriate experience) is available to try each case and, wherever desirable and\\npracticable, there is judicial continuity, including in relation to post-trial hearings.\\n(e)\\nStrike an appropriate balance in the use of resources, by taking account of:\\ni.\\nThe efficient deployment of the judiciary in the Grand Court and the Summary\\nCourts ;\\nii.\\nThe proper use of the courtrooms available at the courts and in this regard\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n14\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 4 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n15\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"schedules for allocation of courtrooms will be prepared in consultation with the\\nCourt Administrator and published along with the Lists on the weekly basis;\\niii.\\nThe provision in long and\/or complex cases for adequate reading and judgment\\nwriting time for the judiciary; [See in this regard Practice Direction No.1 of\\n2012]\\niv.\\nThe facilities in the available courtrooms including the security needs (such as\\nsecure dock), size and equipment, such as video and live link facilities;\\nv.\\nThe proper use of the facilities by those who attend the Courts as jurors;\\nvi.\\nThe availability of and need for certified interpreters in the Courts;\\nvii. The need to return those remanded or sentenced to custody as soon as possible\\nafter the remand is made or sentence is passed, and to facilitate the efficient\\noperation of the prison services;\\n(f)\\nProvide where practicable and within available legal aid resources:\\ni.\\nthe defendant with the advocate of their choice where this does not result in any\\ndelay to the trial of the case.\\n(g)\\nMeet the need, in consultation with the Head of Security (and where appropriate the\\nRCIPS and Prison Services), for special security measures for high-risk defendants;\\n(h)\\nEnsure that proper time (including judicial reading time) is afforded to hearings in\\nwhich the court is exercising powers that impact on the rights of individuals, such as\\napplications for investigative orders, bail hearings or warrants\u2019\\n(i)\\nConsider the significance of ancillary proceedings, such as confiscation hearings, and\\nthe need to deal with such hearings promptly and, where possible, for such hearings\\nto be conducted by the trial judge.\\nA3\\nAlthough the listing practice for each Court will take these principles into account the listing\\npractice adopted may vary depending particularly on the number of courtrooms and the\\nfacilities available, the workload, its volume and type.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n16\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Discharge of judicial responsibilities\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n17\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"A4.\\nThe Presiding Judicial Officer of each court is responsible for:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n18\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"i.\\nensuring that good practice is implemented throughout the Court, such that all\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n19\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 5 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n20\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"hearings commence on time;\\nii.\\nensuring that the cause of trials that do not proceed on the date originally fixed are\\nexamined to see if there is any systematic issue;\\niii.\\nmonitoring the general performance of the Court and the listing practices;\\niv.\\nmonitoring the timeliness of cases and reporting any cases of serious concern to the\\nChief Justice or Chief Magistrate (as the case might be).\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n21\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B\\nListing of trials, Custody Time Limits and transfer of cases [Custody Time Limits\\nhave been the subject of consultation with the Criminal Justice Reform Committee\\n(CJRC) and the Attorney General]\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n22\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Estimates of trial length\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n23\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B1.\\nUnder the regime set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules, the parties will be expected to\\nprovide an accurate estimate of the length of trial at the hearing where the case is to be\\nmanaged (CMH 1) based on a detailed estimate of the time to be taken with each witness\\nto be called, and accurate information about the availability of witnesses.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n24\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B2.\\nAt the hearing the Court will ask the prosecution to clarify any custody time limit (\u201cCTL\u201d)\\ndates which may be applicable. Once the CTL is clarified and approved by the Court, the\\nCourt must direct the court clerk to ensure the CTL date is marked clearly on the court file\\nor electronic file. When a case is subject to a CTL all efforts must be made at the first\\nhearing to list the case within the CTL and the Judge or Magistrate should seek to ensure\\nthis. Further guidance on listing CTL cases can be found below.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n25\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Cases that should usually have fixed trial dates\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n26\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B3.\\nThe cases where fixtures should be given should usually include the following:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n27\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"i.\\nCases involving persons in custody;\\nii.\\nCases  involving serious indictable offences;\\niii.\\nCases involving protected, vulnerable and intimidated witnesses (including domestic\\nviolence cases), whether or not special measures have been ordered by the court;\\niv.\\nCases where the witnesses are under 18 or have to come from overseas;\\nv.\\nCases estimated to last more than a certain time \u2013 the period chosen will depend on\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n28\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 6 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n29\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"the availability of judicial officers, counsel (defence and prosecution) and\\ncourtrooms;\\nvi.\\nCases where a previous hearing has not been effective;\\nvii. Re-trials; and\\nviii. Cases involving expert witnesses.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n30\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Custody Time Limits\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n31\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B4.\\nUnlike in England and Wales1, in the Cayman Islands there are no specific custody time\\nlimits imposed by statute other than those which control police powers to keep persons in\\ncustody pending investigations under section 65 of the Police Act.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n32\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"To help to address this deficit, by Rule 9 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 (CPR) timeframes for the taking of arraignments and the fixing of trial dates are imposed. Also, by\\nparagraph 11 of Practice Direction 5 of 2015 timeframes for conclusion of criminal\\nproceedings in the Summary Courts are identified.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n33\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"The Directions which follow below are intended to reaffirm and clarify the responsibility\\nof the Courts and the parties to ensure that cases are disposed of as soon as reasonably\\npracticable and in so doing to ensure also that custody time limits (CTLs) are strictly\\nobserved.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n34\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"It must be emphasized that in keeping with section 7(1) of the Constitutional Bill of Rights,\\neveryone has the right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of his or her legal\\nrights and obligations by an independent and impartial court within a reasonable time. This\\nright becomes even more compelling when a person is in custody awaiting trial.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n35\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Accordingly the following timeframes and CTLs should be observed and paragraph 11 of\\nPractice Direction 5 of 2015 must be read as if amended by implication:\\ni.\\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Summary Court\\nshould aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 3\\nmonths from the date of first hearing;\\nii.\\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody before the Summary Court to be\\ncommitted for trial in the Grand Court2 should aim to be committed, save only in\\nexceptional circumstances, within 6 weeks from the date of first appearance in the\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n36\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"1 Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 enables the Secretary of State by regulations to\\nset time limits in relation to preliminary stages of criminal proceeding. This is done by way of the\\nProsecution of Offences Custody Time Limit Regulations 1987 which set time limits for cases to be\\nbrought to arraignment.\\n2 Pursuant to section 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2019 Revision)\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n37\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 7 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n38\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Summary Court.\\niii.\\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Grand Court\\nshould aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 9\\nmonths from the date of first appearance in the Grand Court and in keeping with\\nRule 9(4) of the CPR, a date for trial shall be fixed within 6 months of arraignment.\\niv.\\nAccordingly and in keeping with Rule 9(3) of the CPR, arraignments should\\nordinarily proceed no later than 28 days following committal or transmittal of a\\ncase to the Grand Court except where there are outstanding experts\u2019 reports as to\\nfitness to plead or the Court is satisfied that the case is complex or involved.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n39\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"In furtherance of the foregoing, at the first hearing, the prosecution will inform the court of\\nany applicable CTL when the CTL lapses and the CTL will be endorsed on the case file.\\ni.\\nAll efforts must be made to list the case within the CTL.\\nii.\\nIf suitable, the case should be given priority and listed on a date not less than 2 weeks\\nbefore the CTL expires, and the case may be placed in a warned list.\\niii.\\nThe CTL must be kept under continual review by the parties (the Defence and ODPP),\\nHMPS and the presiding judicial officer.\\niv.\\nIf the CTL is at risk of being exceeded, an additional hearing should take place and\\nshould be listed before the trial judge or other judge nominated by the Chief Justice\\nor Chief Magistrate (as the case may be).\\nv.\\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is an issue, the court must itself list the case to\\nconsider the extension of any CTL.\\nvi.\\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is not in issue, but all parties and the court\\nagree that the case will not be ready for trial before the expiration of the CTL, a date\\nmay be fixed outside the CTL. This may be done without prejudice to any application\\nto extend the CTLs or with the express consent of the defence; and this must be noted\\non the case file.\\nB5.\\nAs legal argument may delay the swearing in of a jury, it is desirable to extend the CTL to\\na date later than the first day of the trial.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n40\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Re-trials ordered by the Court of Appeal and Grand Court\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n41\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B6.\\nThe Court must comply with the directions of the Court of Appeal and cannot vary\\ndirections for retrials without reference to the Court of Appeal.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n42\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B7.\\nIn cases where a re-trial is ordered by the Court of Appeal without a time-frame being\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n43\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 8 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n44\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"directed, the CTL will be 90 days starting from the date that the new indictment is\\npreferred i.e. from the date that the indictment is delivered to the Grand Court. In cases\\nwhere a re-trial is ordered of a charge before the Summary Court, whether by the Court of\\nAppeal or the Grand Court, the CTL will be 56 days from the date that the new charge is\\npreferred i.e. from the date that the charge is delivered to the Summary Court. The Courts\\nshall notify the HMPS of this.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n45\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Changes to the date of fixed cases\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n46\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B8.\\nOnce a trial date or window is fixed, it should not be vacated or moved without good reason.\\nUnder the Criminal Procedure Rules, parties are expected to be ready by the trial date.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n47\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B9.\\nThe Listing Officer or CPO may, in circumstances determined by the presiding judicial\\nofficer, agree to the movement of the trial to a date to which the defence and prosecution\\nboth consent, provided the timely hearing of the case is not delayed. The prosecution will\\nbe expected to have consulted the witnesses before agreeing to any change. For indictments\\nchanges to trial dates should only be made on approval of Head of Grand Court Criminal\\nDivision or the Judge who has conduct of the case. The Listing Officer or CPO may in\\ncircumstances determined by the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Division, agree to\\nchanges of other listings. For example, changes in dates for sentencing where SIRs and\\nVIRs are not ready.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n48\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"B10.\\nIn all other circumstances, requests to adjourn or vacate fixtures or trial windows must be\\nreferred to the Assigned Judge or Magistrate for his or her personal attention.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n49\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Listing of hearings other than trials\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n50\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.1.\\nIn addition to trials, the court\u2019s listing practice will have to provide court time for shorter\\nmatters, such as those listed below at C3. These hearings are important, often either for\\nsetting the necessary case management framework for the proper and efficient preparation\\nof cases for trial, or for determining matters that affect the rights of individuals. They must\\nbe afforded the appropriate level of resource that they require to be considered properly,\\nand this may include judicial reading and judgment writing time, as well as an appropriate\\nlength of hearing.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n51\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.2.\\nThe applicant is responsible for notifying the court, and the other party if appropriate, and\\nensuring that the papers are served in good time, including a time estimate for judicial\\nreading time and for the hearing. The applicant must endeavor to complete the application\\nwithin the time estimate provided unless there are exceptional circumstances.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n52\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.3. Hearings other than trials include the following:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n53\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 9 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n54\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"i.\\nApplications for search warrants and Production Orders, sufficient reading time must\\nbe provided, see C.8. below;\\nii.\\nBail applications;\\niii.\\nApplications to vacate or adjourn hearings;\\niv.\\nApplications for dismissal of charges;\\nv.\\nPreparation for trial hearings, plea and trial preparation hearings, and other pre-trial\\ncase management hearings;\\nvi.\\nApplications for disclosure by the Crown of further unused material;\\nvii. Case progression or case management hearings (CMHs);\\nviii. Applications in respect of sentence indications not sought at the CMH;\\nix.\\nSentences;\\nx.\\nApplications under the Criminal Procedure Code or Evidence Act;\\nxi.\\nAppeals from the Summary Courts: it is essential in all cases where witnesses are\\nlikely to be needed on the appeal to check availability before a date is fixed;\\nxii. Appeals from the Youth Court:  a directions hearing will be required to consider\\nspecial measures, ground rules and appropriate adjustments for the hearing of a\\nre-trial.\\nC.4.\\nShort hearings should not generally be listed before a judge such that they may delay the\\nstart or continuation of a trial at the Grand Court. It is envisaged that any such short hearing\\nwill be completed by 10:30am or start after 4:30pm.\\nC.5.\\nEach Court equipped with a video link with the prisons or RCIPS Detention Center must\\nhave in place arrangements for the conduct of remand hearings, pre-trial hearings and\\nsentencing hearings.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n55\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Notifying sureties of hearing dates\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n56\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.6.\\nWhere a surety has entered into a recognizance in the Summary Court in respect of a case\\nallocated or sent to the Grand Court and where the bail order or recognizance refers to\\nattendance at the first hearing in the Grand Court, the defendant should be reminded by the\\npresiding Magistrate (or by the CPO or Court Clerk acting upon the direction of the\\npresiding Magistrate) that the surety should attend the first hearing in the Grand Court in\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n57\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 10 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n58\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"order to provide further recognizance if  ordered by the Grand Court.\\nIf attendance is not arranged, the defendant may be remanded in custody pending the\\nrecognizance being provided.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n59\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.7.\\nThe Court should also notify sureties of the dates of the hearing at the Grand Court at which\\nthe defendant is ordered to appear as far in advance as possible: see the observations of\\nParker LJ in R v Crown Court at Reading ex p. Bello [1992] 3 All ER 353. See also the\\nCriminal Procedure Rules, rule 8 by which the Grand Court may impose new bail\\nconditions and require new bail forms to be completed.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n60\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Application for Production Orders and Search Warrants\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n61\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.8.\\nThe use of production orders and search warrants involve the use of intrusive state powers\\nthat affect the rights and liberties of individuals. It is the responsibility of the court to ensure\\nthat those powers are not abused. To do so, the court must be presented with a properly\\ncompleted application, on the appropriate form, which includes a summary of the\\ninvestigation to provide the context for the order, a clear explanation of how the statutory\\nrequirements are fulfilled, and full and frank disclosure of anything that might undermine\\nthe basis of the application. Further directions on the proper making and consideration of\\nsuch applications will be provided by Practice Direction. However, the complexity of the\\napplication must be taken into account in listing it such that the judge is afforded\\nappropriate reading time and the hearing is given sufficient time for the issues to be\\nconsidered thoroughly, and a short judgment given.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n62\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Confiscation and Related Hearings\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n63\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.9.\\nBy virtue of section 44 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (2020 Revision) (POCA) , applications\\nfor restraint orders should be determined by a Judge of the Grand Court.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n64\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.10. In order to prevent possible dissipation of assets of significant value, applications under the\\nPOCA should be considered urgent when lists are being fixed. In order to prevent potential\\nprejudice, applications for the variation and discharge of orders, for the appointment of\\nreceivers, and applications to punish alleged breaches of orders as a contempt of court\\nshould similarly be treated as urgent and listed expeditiously.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n65\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Confiscation Hearings\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n66\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"C.11. It is important that confiscation hearings take place in good time after the defendant is\\nconvicted or sentenced.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n67\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"- 11 -\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n68\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Publication of Lists\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n69\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"The Listing Officer or CPO of the Grand Court and Summary Court, will, in consultation with the\\nChief Justice and Chief Magistrate respectively continue to publish weekly lists of hearings in\\nthose Courts. Lists will show the courtrooms which are respectively allocated to each Court on\\nthe weekly basis. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal will continue to publish lists in advance\\nfor each session in consultation with the President of the Court of Appeal.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n70\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Effective Date\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n71\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"This Practice Direction shall come into effect on 14th April 2022\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n72\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Dated this 7th day of April 2022\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_n73\", \"num\": null, \"text\": \"Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\\n Chief Justice\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}], \"meta\": {\"notes\": null, \"workflow\": null, \"lifecycle\": {\"source\": \"#cilegis\", \"eventRef\": [{\"eId\": \"e_commence_2022_01_01\", \"date\": \"2022-01-01\", \"type\": \"generation\", \"source\": \"#cilegis\"}]}, \"references\": {\"source\": \"#canary\", \"TLCRole\": [], \"TLCEvent\": [{\"eId\": \"ev_commencement\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/event\/commencement\", \"showAs\": \"commencement\"}], \"TLCPerson\": [], \"TLCConcept\": [{\"eId\": \"inForce\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/concept\/temporal\/in-force\", \"showAs\": \"in force\"}], \"TLCProcess\": [], \"TLCLocation\": [], \"TLCOrganization\": [{\"eId\": \"cilegis\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\", \"showAs\": \"Cayman Islands legislation mirror (kyleg)\"}]}, \"temporalData\": {\"source\": \"#cilegis\", \"temporalGroup\": [{\"eId\": \"tg_inforce_2022_01_01\", \"timeInterval\": [{\"end\": null, \"start\": \"#e_commence_2022_01_01\", \"duration\": null, \"refersTo\": \"#inForce\"}]}]}, \"classification\": null, \"identification\": {\"source\": \"#cilegis\", \"FRBRWork\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2022-01-01\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/!main\", \"FRBRalias\": [{\"name\": \"cmsId\", \"value\": \"2022-0015\"}], \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRnumber\": \"15 of 2022\", \"FRBRcountry\": \"ky\", \"FRBRsubtype\": \"amending\"}, \"FRBRExpression\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2022-01-01\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01\/!main\", \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRlanguage\": \"eng\"}, \"FRBRManifestation\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01.xml\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2026-06-22\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/amending\/2022\/15\/eng@2022-01-01.xml\", \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRformat\": \"application\/xml\"}}}, \"name\": \"act\", \"header\": {\"title\": \"Cayman Islands Identification Card Act, 2022\", \"actNumber\": \"15 of 2022\", \"longTitle\": null}}, \"doc\": null, \"bill\": null, \"judgment\": null}}","akn_full_text":"CAYMAN ISLANDS\n\nPRACTICE DIRECTIONON LISTINGS AND CUSTODY\nTIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS\n(PD 1 of 2022)\n\nSupplement No. 1 published with Legislative Gazette No. 16 of 14th April, 2022\n.\n\n- 2 -\n\nPRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2022\n\nPRACTICE DIRECTION ON LISTINGS AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN\nCRIMINAL MATTERS\n\nJudicial Listing Officers\u2019 responsibility and key principles\n\nMuch of this Direction is based upon the English Criminal Practice Direction 2015 and it must\nbe read in conjunction with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 5\nof 2015 (Criminal Case Management in the Summary Court).\nListing as a judicial responsibility and function\nA1.\nListing is both a judicial and administrative function. The purpose is to ensure that all cases\nare brought to a hearing or trial in accordance with the interests of justice, that the resources\navailable for criminal justice are deployed as effectively as possible, and that cases are\nheard by an appropriate judicial officer or bench with the minimum of delay.\n\n(a) The Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate, in consultation with the Listing Officer and\nCase Progression Offices respectively of the Grand and the Summary Court (CPO)\nshall have the overall responsibility for approving the weekly list of all Grand Court\nand Summary Court matters, respectively. The Chief Justice will assign day to day\nresponsibility to the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Divisions for the listing of\ncriminal cases.\n\n(b) The Listing Officer and the CPO respectively of the Grand Court and Summary Courts\nis responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operation of listing practice under the\ndirection of the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate. The Listing Officer\/CPO has one\nof the most important functions at the Courts and makes a vital contribution to the\nefficient running of Court and to the efficient operation of the administration of criminal\njustice;\n\n(c) In the Grand Court, the CPO, subject to the daily supervision of the Judge responsible\nfor the Criminal Division, is responsible for liaising with the Listing Officer to settle\nthe list of Grand Court criminal hearings and trials. To this end the CPO and the Listing\nOfficer shall meet every week on Thursday to settle the List of criminal cases for the\nensuing week.\n\n(d) In the Summary Courts, the CPO, subject to the supervision of the Chief Magistrate, is\nresponsible for administering the listing practice. The day-to-day setting of that listing\npractice is the responsibility of the Chief Magistrate in consultation with the Magistrates\nand with the assistance of the CPO.\n\n- 3 -\n\nKey principles of listing\nA2.\nWhen approving the lists, the Chief Justice [or the assigned Judge] and Chief Magistrate\nrespectively will take into account the following principles:\n(a)\nEnsure the timely trial of cases and resolution of other issues (such as confiscation)\nso that justice is not delayed. The following factors are relevant:\ni.\nIn general, each case should be tried within as short a time of its arrival in the\nCourt as is consistent with the interests of justice, the needs of victims and\nwitnesses, and with the proper and timely preparation by the prosecution and\ndefence of their cases in accordance with the directions and timetable set;\nii.\nPriority should be accorded to the trial of young defendants, and cases where\nthere are vulnerable or young witnesses. In R v Barker [2010] WWCA Crim 4,\nthe Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales highlighted \u201cthe importance to the\ntrial and investigative process of keeping any delay in a case involving a child\ncomplainant to an irreducible minimum\u201d;\niii.\nCustody time limits imposed by the Constitution, the Police Act or habeas\ncorpus principles should be observed;\niv.\nEvery effort must be made to avoid delay including in cases in which the\ndefendant is on bail;\n(b)\nEnsure that in the Summary Courts, unless impracticable , non-custody anticipated\nguilty plea cases are listed no longer than 14 days after a charge is filed with the Court\n, and non-custody anticipated not guilty pleas are listed no longer than 28 days after\na charge is filed [See also in this regard, the provisions of paragraph 13.4 \u2013 13.6 of\nPractice Direction No. 5 of 2015];\n(c)\nProvide, when possible, for certainty and\/or as much advance notice as possible, of\nthe trial date; and take all reasonable steps to ensure that the trial date remains fixed:\n(d)\nEnsure that a Judge or Magistrate (with any necessary authorization and of\nappropriate experience) is available to try each case and, wherever desirable and\npracticable, there is judicial continuity, including in relation to post-trial hearings.\n(e)\nStrike an appropriate balance in the use of resources, by taking account of:\ni.\nThe efficient deployment of the judiciary in the Grand Court and the Summary\nCourts ;\nii.\nThe proper use of the courtrooms available at the courts and in this regard\n\n- 4 -\n\nschedules for allocation of courtrooms will be prepared in consultation with the\nCourt Administrator and published along with the Lists on the weekly basis;\niii.\nThe provision in long and\/or complex cases for adequate reading and judgment\nwriting time for the judiciary; [See in this regard Practice Direction No.1 of\n2012]\niv.\nThe facilities in the available courtrooms including the security needs (such as\nsecure dock), size and equipment, such as video and live link facilities;\nv.\nThe proper use of the facilities by those who attend the Courts as jurors;\nvi.\nThe availability of and need for certified interpreters in the Courts;\nvii. The need to return those remanded or sentenced to custody as soon as possible\nafter the remand is made or sentence is passed, and to facilitate the efficient\noperation of the prison services;\n(f)\nProvide where practicable and within available legal aid resources:\ni.\nthe defendant with the advocate of their choice where this does not result in any\ndelay to the trial of the case.\n(g)\nMeet the need, in consultation with the Head of Security (and where appropriate the\nRCIPS and Prison Services), for special security measures for high-risk defendants;\n(h)\nEnsure that proper time (including judicial reading time) is afforded to hearings in\nwhich the court is exercising powers that impact on the rights of individuals, such as\napplications for investigative orders, bail hearings or warrants\u2019\n(i)\nConsider the significance of ancillary proceedings, such as confiscation hearings, and\nthe need to deal with such hearings promptly and, where possible, for such hearings\nto be conducted by the trial judge.\nA3\nAlthough the listing practice for each Court will take these principles into account the listing\npractice adopted may vary depending particularly on the number of courtrooms and the\nfacilities available, the workload, its volume and type.\n\nDischarge of judicial responsibilities\n\nA4.\nThe Presiding Judicial Officer of each court is responsible for:\n\ni.\nensuring that good practice is implemented throughout the Court, such that all\n\n- 5 -\n\nhearings commence on time;\nii.\nensuring that the cause of trials that do not proceed on the date originally fixed are\nexamined to see if there is any systematic issue;\niii.\nmonitoring the general performance of the Court and the listing practices;\niv.\nmonitoring the timeliness of cases and reporting any cases of serious concern to the\nChief Justice or Chief Magistrate (as the case might be).\n\nB\nListing of trials, Custody Time Limits and transfer of cases [Custody Time Limits\nhave been the subject of consultation with the Criminal Justice Reform Committee\n(CJRC) and the Attorney General]\n\nEstimates of trial length\n\nB1.\nUnder the regime set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules, the parties will be expected to\nprovide an accurate estimate of the length of trial at the hearing where the case is to be\nmanaged (CMH 1) based on a detailed estimate of the time to be taken with each witness\nto be called, and accurate information about the availability of witnesses.\n\nB2.\nAt the hearing the Court will ask the prosecution to clarify any custody time limit (\u201cCTL\u201d)\ndates which may be applicable. Once the CTL is clarified and approved by the Court, the\nCourt must direct the court clerk to ensure the CTL date is marked clearly on the court file\nor electronic file. When a case is subject to a CTL all efforts must be made at the first\nhearing to list the case within the CTL and the Judge or Magistrate should seek to ensure\nthis. Further guidance on listing CTL cases can be found below.\n\nCases that should usually have fixed trial dates\n\nB3.\nThe cases where fixtures should be given should usually include the following:\n\ni.\nCases involving persons in custody;\nii.\nCases  involving serious indictable offences;\niii.\nCases involving protected, vulnerable and intimidated witnesses (including domestic\nviolence cases), whether or not special measures have been ordered by the court;\niv.\nCases where the witnesses are under 18 or have to come from overseas;\nv.\nCases estimated to last more than a certain time \u2013 the period chosen will depend on\n\n- 6 -\n\nthe availability of judicial officers, counsel (defence and prosecution) and\ncourtrooms;\nvi.\nCases where a previous hearing has not been effective;\nvii. Re-trials; and\nviii. Cases involving expert witnesses.\n\nCustody Time Limits\n\nB4.\nUnlike in England and Wales1, in the Cayman Islands there are no specific custody time\nlimits imposed by statute other than those which control police powers to keep persons in\ncustody pending investigations under section 65 of the Police Act.\n\n            To help to address this deficit, by Rule 9 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 (CPR) timeframes for the taking of arraignments and the fixing of trial dates are imposed. Also, by\nparagraph 11 of Practice Direction 5 of 2015 timeframes for conclusion of criminal\nproceedings in the Summary Courts are identified.\n\n            The Directions which follow below are intended to reaffirm and clarify the responsibility\nof the Courts and the parties to ensure that cases are disposed of as soon as reasonably\npracticable and in so doing to ensure also that custody time limits (CTLs) are strictly\nobserved.\n\nIt must be emphasized that in keeping with section 7(1) of the Constitutional Bill of Rights,\neveryone has the right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of his or her legal\nrights and obligations by an independent and impartial court within a reasonable time. This\nright becomes even more compelling when a person is in custody awaiting trial.\n\n            Accordingly the following timeframes and CTLs should be observed and paragraph 11 of\nPractice Direction 5 of 2015 must be read as if amended by implication:\ni.\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Summary Court\nshould aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 3\nmonths from the date of first hearing;\nii.\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody before the Summary Court to be\ncommitted for trial in the Grand Court2 should aim to be committed, save only in\nexceptional circumstances, within 6 weeks from the date of first appearance in the\n\n1 Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 enables the Secretary of State by regulations to\nset time limits in relation to preliminary stages of criminal proceeding. This is done by way of the\nProsecution of Offences Custody Time Limit Regulations 1987 which set time limits for cases to be\nbrought to arraignment.\n2 Pursuant to section 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2019 Revision)\n\n- 7 -\n\nSummary Court.\niii.\nEvery case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Grand Court\nshould aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 9\nmonths from the date of first appearance in the Grand Court and in keeping with\nRule 9(4) of the CPR, a date for trial shall be fixed within 6 months of arraignment.\niv.\nAccordingly and in keeping with Rule 9(3) of the CPR, arraignments should\nordinarily proceed no later than 28 days following committal or transmittal of a\ncase to the Grand Court except where there are outstanding experts\u2019 reports as to\nfitness to plead or the Court is satisfied that the case is complex or involved.\n\n             In furtherance of the foregoing, at the first hearing, the prosecution will inform the court of\nany applicable CTL when the CTL lapses and the CTL will be endorsed on the case file.\ni.\nAll efforts must be made to list the case within the CTL.\nii.\nIf suitable, the case should be given priority and listed on a date not less than 2 weeks\nbefore the CTL expires, and the case may be placed in a warned list.\niii.\nThe CTL must be kept under continual review by the parties (the Defence and ODPP),\nHMPS and the presiding judicial officer.\niv.\nIf the CTL is at risk of being exceeded, an additional hearing should take place and\nshould be listed before the trial judge or other judge nominated by the Chief Justice\nor Chief Magistrate (as the case may be).\nv.\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is an issue, the court must itself list the case to\nconsider the extension of any CTL.\nvi.\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is not in issue, but all parties and the court\nagree that the case will not be ready for trial before the expiration of the CTL, a date\nmay be fixed outside the CTL. This may be done without prejudice to any application\nto extend the CTLs or with the express consent of the defence; and this must be noted\non the case file.\nB5.\nAs legal argument may delay the swearing in of a jury, it is desirable to extend the CTL to\na date later than the first day of the trial.\n\nRe-trials ordered by the Court of Appeal and Grand Court\n\nB6.\nThe Court must comply with the directions of the Court of Appeal and cannot vary\ndirections for retrials without reference to the Court of Appeal.\n\nB7.\nIn cases where a re-trial is ordered by the Court of Appeal without a time-frame being\n\n- 8 -\n\ndirected, the CTL will be 90 days starting from the date that the new indictment is\npreferred i.e. from the date that the indictment is delivered to the Grand Court. In cases\nwhere a re-trial is ordered of a charge before the Summary Court, whether by the Court of\nAppeal or the Grand Court, the CTL will be 56 days from the date that the new charge is\npreferred i.e. from the date that the charge is delivered to the Summary Court. The Courts\nshall notify the HMPS of this.\n\nChanges to the date of fixed cases\n\nB8.\nOnce a trial date or window is fixed, it should not be vacated or moved without good reason.\nUnder the Criminal Procedure Rules, parties are expected to be ready by the trial date.\n\nB9.\nThe Listing Officer or CPO may, in circumstances determined by the presiding judicial\nofficer, agree to the movement of the trial to a date to which the defence and prosecution\nboth consent, provided the timely hearing of the case is not delayed. The prosecution will\nbe expected to have consulted the witnesses before agreeing to any change. For indictments\nchanges to trial dates should only be made on approval of Head of Grand Court Criminal\nDivision or the Judge who has conduct of the case. The Listing Officer or CPO may in\ncircumstances determined by the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Division, agree to\nchanges of other listings. For example, changes in dates for sentencing where SIRs and\nVIRs are not ready.\n\nB10.\nIn all other circumstances, requests to adjourn or vacate fixtures or trial windows must be\nreferred to the Assigned Judge or Magistrate for his or her personal attention.\n\nListing of hearings other than trials\n\nC.1.\nIn addition to trials, the court\u2019s listing practice will have to provide court time for shorter\nmatters, such as those listed below at C3. These hearings are important, often either for\nsetting the necessary case management framework for the proper and efficient preparation\nof cases for trial, or for determining matters that affect the rights of individuals. They must\nbe afforded the appropriate level of resource that they require to be considered properly,\nand this may include judicial reading and judgment writing time, as well as an appropriate\nlength of hearing.\n\nC.2.\nThe applicant is responsible for notifying the court, and the other party if appropriate, and\nensuring that the papers are served in good time, including a time estimate for judicial\nreading time and for the hearing. The applicant must endeavor to complete the application\nwithin the time estimate provided unless there are exceptional circumstances.\n\nC.3. Hearings other than trials include the following:\n\n- 9 -\n\ni.\nApplications for search warrants and Production Orders, sufficient reading time must\nbe provided, see C.8. below;\nii.\nBail applications;\niii.\nApplications to vacate or adjourn hearings;\niv.\nApplications for dismissal of charges;\nv.\nPreparation for trial hearings, plea and trial preparation hearings, and other pre-trial\ncase management hearings;\nvi.\nApplications for disclosure by the Crown of further unused material;\nvii. Case progression or case management hearings (CMHs);\nviii. Applications in respect of sentence indications not sought at the CMH;\nix.\nSentences;\nx.\nApplications under the Criminal Procedure Code or Evidence Act;\nxi.\nAppeals from the Summary Courts: it is essential in all cases where witnesses are\nlikely to be needed on the appeal to check availability before a date is fixed;\nxii. Appeals from the Youth Court:  a directions hearing will be required to consider\nspecial measures, ground rules and appropriate adjustments for the hearing of a\nre-trial.\nC.4.\nShort hearings should not generally be listed before a judge such that they may delay the\nstart or continuation of a trial at the Grand Court. It is envisaged that any such short hearing\nwill be completed by 10:30am or start after 4:30pm.\nC.5.\nEach Court equipped with a video link with the prisons or RCIPS Detention Center must\nhave in place arrangements for the conduct of remand hearings, pre-trial hearings and\nsentencing hearings.\n\nNotifying sureties of hearing dates\n\nC.6.\nWhere a surety has entered into a recognizance in the Summary Court in respect of a case\nallocated or sent to the Grand Court and where the bail order or recognizance refers to\nattendance at the first hearing in the Grand Court, the defendant should be reminded by the\npresiding Magistrate (or by the CPO or Court Clerk acting upon the direction of the\npresiding Magistrate) that the surety should attend the first hearing in the Grand Court in\n\n- 10 -\n\norder to provide further recognizance if  ordered by the Grand Court.\nIf attendance is not arranged, the defendant may be remanded in custody pending the\nrecognizance being provided.\n\nC.7.\nThe Court should also notify sureties of the dates of the hearing at the Grand Court at which\nthe defendant is ordered to appear as far in advance as possible: see the observations of\nParker LJ in R v Crown Court at Reading ex p. Bello [1992] 3 All ER 353. See also the\nCriminal Procedure Rules, rule 8 by which the Grand Court may impose new bail\nconditions and require new bail forms to be completed.\n\nApplication for Production Orders and Search Warrants\n\nC.8.\nThe use of production orders and search warrants involve the use of intrusive state powers\nthat affect the rights and liberties of individuals. It is the responsibility of the court to ensure\nthat those powers are not abused. To do so, the court must be presented with a properly\ncompleted application, on the appropriate form, which includes a summary of the\ninvestigation to provide the context for the order, a clear explanation of how the statutory\nrequirements are fulfilled, and full and frank disclosure of anything that might undermine\nthe basis of the application. Further directions on the proper making and consideration of\nsuch applications will be provided by Practice Direction. However, the complexity of the\napplication must be taken into account in listing it such that the judge is afforded\nappropriate reading time and the hearing is given sufficient time for the issues to be\nconsidered thoroughly, and a short judgment given.\n\nConfiscation and Related Hearings\n\nC.9.\nBy virtue of section 44 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (2020 Revision) (POCA) , applications\nfor restraint orders should be determined by a Judge of the Grand Court.\n\nC.10. In order to prevent possible dissipation of assets of significant value, applications under the\nPOCA should be considered urgent when lists are being fixed. In order to prevent potential\nprejudice, applications for the variation and discharge of orders, for the appointment of\nreceivers, and applications to punish alleged breaches of orders as a contempt of court\nshould similarly be treated as urgent and listed expeditiously.\n\nConfiscation Hearings\n\nC.11. It is important that confiscation hearings take place in good time after the defendant is\nconvicted or sentenced.\n\n- 11 -\n\nPublication of Lists\n\nThe Listing Officer or CPO of the Grand Court and Summary Court, will, in consultation with the\nChief Justice and Chief Magistrate respectively continue to publish weekly lists of hearings in\nthose Courts. Lists will show the courtrooms which are respectively allocated to each Court on\nthe weekly basis. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal will continue to publish lists in advance\nfor each session in consultation with the President of the Court of Appeal.\n\nEffective Date\n\nThis Practice Direction shall come into effect on 14th April 2022\n\nDated this 7th day of April 2022\n\n Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\n Chief Justice","akn_extracted_at":"2026-06-22 15:41:20.267065+00","cms_id":"2022-0015","law_type":"amending","year":"2022","number":"15","title":"Cayman Islands Identification Card Act, 2022","status":"in_force"},"provenance":{"files":[{"file_id":"6796","expr_id":"2015","kind":"akn_xml","filename":"2022-0015.akn.xml","source_url":null,"storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.akn.xml","content_md5":"f069d15783a4aee8a62eb1765b7e6e2f","byte_size":"31184","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-22 15:41:20.589612+00"},{"file_id":"4029","expr_id":"2015","kind":"pristine_pdf","filename":"2022-0015.pdf","source_url":"\/cms\/images\/LEGISLATION\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.pdf","storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/pristine\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.pdf","content_md5":"b03774191ff6d41106e721771a81accd","byte_size":"443808","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-16 04:01:11.161667+00"},{"file_id":"4030","expr_id":"2015","kind":"working_pdf","filename":"2022-0015.pdf","source_url":"\/cms\/images\/LEGISLATION\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.pdf","storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/AMENDING\/2022\/2022-0015\/2022-0015.pdf","content_md5":"b03774191ff6d41106e721771a81accd","byte_size":"443808","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-16 04:01:11.161667+00"}],"paragraph_count":63,"latest_history":null},"quality":{"expr_id":"2015","doc_id":"2015","quality_state":"known_issue","quality_score":"75","needs_human_review":"t","deterministic_categories":"{title_mismatch}","llm_categories":"{}","repair_actions":"{strip_page_furniture,verify_title_metadata}","finding_severity_counts":"{\"high\": 1}","finding_summary":"stored title is not visible in the opening extracted text","assessed_at":"2026-06-22 15:29:46.268034+00","updated_at":"2026-06-22 15:29:46.268034+00"}}