{"kind":"expression","expression":{"expr_id":"714","doc_id":"714","label":"2024 Consolidation","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\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01","akn_envelope":"{\"_canary\": {\"iri\": {\"work\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\", \"expression\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01\", \"manifestation\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01.pdf\"}, \"pdf\": {\"md5\": \"9850a6e637be16a0241fdc6c708fa568\", \"path\": \"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf\", \"pages\": 416, \"filename\": \"2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf\"}, \"errors\": [], \"extraction\": {\"model\": null, \"stats\": {\"word_count\": 106069, \"paragraph_count\": 72, \"text_char_count\": 648310}, \"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\": \"Grand Court Act (2015 Revision) (2024 Consolidation) (Published in electronic format only) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 PUBLISHING DETAILS The Practice Directions and Circulars made by the Chief Justice, the Grand Court Rules Committee, the Court of Appeals Rules Committee and the Insolvency Rules Committee and as amended by Law 56 of 2020. As consolidated \u2014 PD 2 of 1995-1st May, 1995 PD 3 of 1995-1st May, 1995 PD 5 of 1995-15th December, 1995 PD 1 of 1996-5th January, 1996 PD 2 of 1996-7th March, 1996 PD 1 of 1997-1st April, 1997 PD 2 of 1997-9th April, 1997 PD 3 of 1997-11th August, 1997 PD 1 of 1999-28th January, 1999 PD 2 of 1999-28th January, 1999 PD 4 of 1999-26th June, 1999 PD 5 of 1999-27th October, 1999 PD 1 of 2000-__December, 1999 PD 1 of 2001-22nd October, 2001 PD 1 of 2004-17th March, 2004 PD 2 of 2004-26th May, 2004 PD 2 of 2006-24th October, 2006 PD 1 of 2008-31st October, 2008 PD 2 of 2010-17th September, 2010 PD 1 of 2011-14th April, 2011 PD 1 of 2012-7th March, 2012 PD 2 of 2012-9th March, 2012 PD 3 of 2012-9th March, 2012 PD 4 of 2012-9th February, 2012 PD 5 of 2012-22nd May, 2012 PD 6 of 2012-8th July, 2012 PD 7 of 2012-19th October, 2012 PD 1 of 2013-9th April, 2013 PD 2 of 2013-26th September, 2013 PD 3 of 2013-26th September, 2013 PD 4 of 2013-12th December, 2013 PC 1 of 2014-29th January, 2014 PD 1 of 2014-6th January, 2014 PD 2 of 2014-6th January, 2014 PD 3 of 2014-6th January, 2014 PD 4 of 2014-6th January, 2014 PD 5 of 2014-17th January, 2014 PD 5 of 2014 (Amended)-21st January, 2021 PD 6 of 2014-30th April, 2014 PD 7 of 2014-30th April, 2014 PD 9 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 PD 10 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Publication Details Continued Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 PD 11 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 PD 12 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 PD 13 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 PD 14 of 2014-2nd May, 2014 PD 15 of 2014-30th May, 2014 PD 16 of 2014-30th May, 2014 PD 1 of 2015-13th July, 2015 PD 2 of 2015-20th February, 2015 PD 3 of 2015-9th July, 2015 PD 4 of 2015-9th July, 2015 PD 5 of 2015-29th July, 2015 PD 1 of 2016-8th February, 2016 PD 1 of 2017-1st August, 2017 PD 2 of 2017-1st August, 2017 PD 3 of 2017-4th August, 2017 PD 4 of 2017-4th August, 2017 PD 1 of 2018-31st May, 2018 PD 1 of 2019-26th February, 2019 PD 2 of 2019-31st July, 2019 PD 3 of 2019-25th September, 2019 PD 4 of 2019-21st October, 2019 PD 1 of 2020-2nd January, 2020 PD 2 of 2020-25th March, 2020 PD 3 of 2020-29th March, 2020 PD 4 of 2020-29th March, 2020 PD 5 of 2020-6th April, 2020 PD 5A of 2020-6th April, 2020 PD 5B of 2020-21st May, 2020 PD 5C of 2020-6th April, 2020 PD 5D of 2020-6th April, 2020 PD 5E of 2020-21st May, 2020 PD 6 of 2020-9th April, 2020 PD 6A of 2020-5th May, 2020 PD 7 of 2020-13th April, 2020 PD 8 of 2020-5th May, 2020 PD 9 of 2020-5th May, 2020 PD 10 of 2020-29th September, 2020 PD 11 of 2020-14th December, 2020 PD 2 of 2021-2nd May 2021 PD 3 of 2021-29th November, 2021 PD 1 of 2022-7th April, 2022 PD 2 of 2022-12th April, 2022 PD 3 of 2022-15th August, 2022 PD 4 of 2022-15th August, 2022 PD 5 of 2022-15th August, 2022 PD 6 of 2022-10th October, 2022 PD 7 of 2022-10th October, 2022. Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Originally enacted \u2014 Law 56 of 2020-7th December, 2020. Consolidated this 31st day of December, 2023. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Arrangement of Practice Directions Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Act (2015 Revision) (2024 Consolidation) Arrangement of Practice Directions\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_1\", \"num\": \"1.\", \"text\": \"GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995 Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Calculation of Post-Judgment Interest GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995 Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Method of Payment GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995 Trial Bundles GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996 Land Acquisition Act (as amended and revised) \u2013 Payment of Compensation into Court GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996 Trial Bundles GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Legal Aid Rules 1997 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997 Register of Judgments and Register of Writs, etc. Arrangement of Practice Directions Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997 Confidentiality and Publication of Chamber's Proceedings GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Filing Documents in Court GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999 Drawing Up and Filing of Judgments and Orders GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999 INDICTMENTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 LEGAL AID FORMS - AFFIDAVIT OF MEANS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000 LISTING FORMS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004 CORRECTIONS TO JUDGMENTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2004 PROCEEDINGS BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006 ORDERS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008 REGISTER OF JUDGEMENTS - REGISTER OF WRITS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 SCHEMES OF ARRANGEMENT AND COMPROMISE UNDER SECTION 86 OF THE COMPANIES ACT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011 GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012 DELIVERY OF RESERVED JUDGMENTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012 PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\u2028IN WHICH THE JUDGE PRESIDES FROM OVERSEAS Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Arrangement of Practice Directions Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012 ATTIRE FOR PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 LIMITED ADMISSION AS AN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 PRACTICE DIRECTION ON APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTIONS 72, 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 LISTING OF FAMILY LAW PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012 PAYMENT SCHEDULES - AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 CONSENT ORDERS IN ANCILLARY RELIEF PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013 PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OF WINDING UP PETITIONS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 JUDICIAL REVIEW \u2014 PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 PRACTICE GUIDANCE GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014 REQUIREMENT FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS MADE IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014 COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNSEL AND THE COURT ETC. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014 JURY TRIALS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014 ORDERS FOR SALES BY PRIVATE TREATY PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013) Arrangement of Practice Directions Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Amended) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014 Procedure for making Summary Court Applications pursuant to the Police Act (as amended and revised) on Weekends and Public Holidays GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 (Remand Proceedings by way of teleconference) - Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014 COMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT \u2013 FAMILY DIVISION and IN \u201cCOURT OF PROTECTION MATTERS\u201d GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 COURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S REPORTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 COURT BUNDLES IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014 ARRIVAL OF CHILDREN IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS BY AIR GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014 CONTRIBUTION ORDERS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 RECOMMENDED PRACTICES IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT WHEN INITIATING DIRECT JUDICIAL COMMUNICATION WITH A JUDGE IN A FOREIGN COURT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 INHERENT JURISDICTION (INCLUDING WARDSHIP) PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION (INCLUDING 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 2015 (as amended and revised) 197 Applications for Sealing Orders and for inspection of Court Files in Civil Proceedings Grand Court Rules Order 63 r 3 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015 Applications for inspection of Criminal Court Files Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 3 OF 2015 LIST OF APPROVED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS (GCR O. 38 AND O. 41) TAKING EVIDENCE Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Arrangement of Practice Directions Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 FROM WITNESSES, AFFIANTS AND DEPONENTS WHO DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 CAYMAN ISLANDS SUMMARY COURT - CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION - PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017 Payments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts Act and Grand Court Rules Order 92 (GCR O. 92). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Registration of Foreign Maintenance Orders or Judgments Sections 14, 22 and 23 of the Maintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"the Law\\\") GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Court Stenographer Services GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017 Filing of Winding Up Petitions GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Court-to-court communications and cooperation in cross-border insolvency and restructuring cases GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019 DIRECTIONS FOR PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER SECTION 238 OF THE COMPANIES ACT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Adoption of Judicial Insolvency Network Modalities For Court-To-Court Communications GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT: COSTS ESTIMATES GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019 Criminal Procedure - Remand Warrants where defendant found unfit to plead - Committal Warrants where defendant found to be not guilty by reason of insanity GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 MEDIATION INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT RULES 2020 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 COVID 19: GUIDANCE FOR THE FAMILY DIVISION - 25 MARCH 2020 Arrangement of Practice Directions Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020 FAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020 FAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS - FAMILY MENTION DAYS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 THE USE OF E-MAILS FOR FILING AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, COURT SEALS AND STAMPS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - FAMILY REGISTRY GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD REMOTE HEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020 FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD HEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020 Sittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of video-conference GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020 PUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS BY AUDIO OR VIDEO LINKS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020 GUIDANCE FOR THE REMOTE NOTARISATION AND ATTESTATION OF DOCUMENTS BY ELECTRONIC MEANS Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Arrangement of Practice Directions Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020 1. DRAWING UP AND FILING OF JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_2\", \"num\": \"2.\", \"text\": \"FORM OF ORDERS MADE BY THE COURT APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT OR WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_3\", \"num\": \"3.\", \"text\": \"PROVISION OF ORDERS OF THE COURT BY THE CLERK OF COURT GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 ELECTRONIC FILING (E-FILING) AND E-SERVICE IN THE GRAND COURT OF DOCUMENTS VIA THE JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION E-FILING PLATFORM GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021 COURT FEES RULES (as amended and revised) (\u201cthe Rules\u201d) - GRAND COURT RULES ORDER 62 RULE 3(1) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021 EXHIBITS IN CRIMINAL CASES GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 LISTING AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 JUDICIAL MEDIATION GUIDELINES GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022 LISTING OF CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIVIL DIVISION, SHORT SUMMONSES AND ASSIGNED JUDGES GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022 PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT (as amended and revised) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 PUBLIC ACCESS TO CRIMINAL COURTS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 McKENZIE FRIENDS (CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS) ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Act (2015 Revision) (2024 Consolidation) 1. Citation 1. These Practice Directions may be cited as the Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995 (GCR O.1, r.12) Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Calculation of Post-Judgment Interest (GCR O.50A, r.7) 1. Wherever a judgment debt is ordered to be paid by instalments pursuant to an attachment of earnings order made under GCR Order 50A, rule 7, post-judgment interest will be calculated at the time of making the order. 2. The amount of interest will be calculated on the assumption that the instalments are paid on due date, using the following formula where D is the amount of the judgment debt (including principal and pre-judgment interest); N is the number of monthly instalments; R is the prescribed rate; I is the interest payable; and X is the amount of each instalment, i.e. the normal monthly deduction rate. (\ud835\udc37\ud835\udc65\ud835\udc41 24 ) \ud835\udc45= 1 Amount of each instalment will be (\ud835\udc37 \ud835\udc41) + ( \ud835\udc3c \ud835\udc41) = \ud835\udc4b Example: Judgment debt CI$12,500 which is to be payable by equal instalments over 36 months. The prescribed rate of post-judgment interest payable on CI dollar debts is currently 8% per annum. The monthly instalment is therefore CI$388.89 calculated as follows: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Interest payable (12,500\ud835\udc6536 ) 8% = 1,500 The amount of each instalment (12,500 ) + (1,500 36 ) = 388.89\/\ud835\udc5a\ud835\udc5c\ud835\udc5b\ud835\udc61\u210e Each instalment therefore comprises principal of CI$347.22 and interest of CI$41.67. DATED this 1st day of May, 1995. _______________________________ Hon. George Harre, Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995 (GCR O.1, r.12) Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Method of Payment (GCR O.50A, r.8) 1. Payment of sums due under attachment of earnings orders must be made by cheque made payable to \\\"The Accountant General of the Grand Court\\\". 2. Cheques must be sent by post or hand delivered to the Court Funds Office, Government Administration Building, George Town. 3. Upon being served with an attachment of earnings order, employers will also be provided with a book of pre-printed carbonised lodgment\/receipt forms.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_4\", \"num\": \"4.\", \"text\": \"The employer must complete a carbonised lodgment\/receipt form and send both the white original and the blue copy to the Court Funds Office with each payment.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_5\", \"num\": \"5.\", \"text\": \"The blue copy receipt form will then be signed by an authorised officer of the Court Funds Office and returned to the employer as that employer\u2019s receipt.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_6\", \"num\": \"6.\", \"text\": \"Deductions made from an employee's remuneration must be recorded in the employer's work account maintained in accordance with Section 30(1) of the Labour Act (as amended and revised), and the receipts issued by the Court Funds Office should be treated as part of the work account to be preserved for at least two years. MADE this 1st day of May, 1995 with the prior approval of the Chief Justice of the Grand Court _______________________________ Alan Mason, Accountant General GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995 (GCR O.1, r.12) Trial Bundles (GCR O.34, r.10) 1. Order 34, rule 10 is intended to ensure that: (a) The trial judge is able to read the core documents prior to the commencement of the trial; and (b) The Court has available all necessary documents, properly organised into bundles, at the commencement of every trial. The rule requires the plaintiff to deliver bundles of documents to the Clerk of the Court for these purposes. 2. Order 34, rule 10 does not specify how, when or by whom the bundles of documents shall be prepared. This is a matter left to the parties to determine by agreement having regard to the circumstances of each individual case. 3. In cases involving a small number of documents (such as personal injury claims) it will normally be appropriate for all the documents to be included in the core bundles; for those bundles to be created by the plaintiff; and for them to be delivered to the defendant at the same time as they are delivered to the Clerk of the Court in accordance with rule 10(1). 4. In cases involving large numbers of documents, it would normally be appropriate for the parties' attorneys to make arrangements for those documents to be indexed, paginated and put into bundles long before the plaintiff is required to deliver them to the Clerk of the Court. 5. It is the duty of the parties and their attorneys to make all such arrangements for the preparation and exchange of bundles of documents as may be appropriate, having regard to the circumstances of the case. The objective is to ensure that both parties have available to them bundles of all Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the documents (indexed, paginated and organised in the way in which they will be used at the trial) at such time as may be necessary to enable them to properly prepare their respective cases in time for the commencement of the trial. DATED this 7th day of March, 1996 HON. GEORGE HARRE Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996 (GCR O.1, r.12) Land Acquisition Act (as amended and revised) \u2013 Payment of Compensation into Court 1.  Where a lodgment of funds in Court is made by the Cabinet pursuant to Section 27(2) of the Land Acquisition Act (as amended and revised), such payment shall be accompanied by a request for lodgment in practice form no. 1. 2.  The request for lodgment shall specify particulars of the title of the land to which the compensation relates and the names and addresses of all the persons who are believed to be entitled or claim to be entitled to all or part of such compensation. 3.  The officer who signs the request for lodgment on behalf of the Cabinet should send notice of lodgment to all the persons who are believed to be entitled or claim to be entitled to all or part of such compensation. MADE this 5th day of January, 1996 with the prior approval of the Chief Justice of the Grand Court. _______________________________ Alan Mason, Accountant General Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 REQUEST FOR LODGMENT Pursuant to Section 27 of the Land Acquisition Act (as amended and revised) GCR Form 1 Description of Land I, __________________________________, request that the Accountant General of the Grand Court do receive into Court for lodgment to a Nominated Account the sum of CI$_______, being the compensation awarded by the Cabinet in respect of the compulsory acquisition of the above-mentioned land. DATED this ____ day of _____________________, 20____ Signed ___________________________________________ [ ] The following persons are believed to be entitled or claim to be entitled to all or part of this compensation: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COURT FUNDS OFFICE USE GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Date received Nominated Account number Date funds transferred to a Nominated Account Lodgment approved by: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996 (GCR O.1, r.12) Trial Bundles (GCR O.34, r.10) 1. Order 34, rule 10 is intended to ensure that: (a) The trial judge is able to read the core documents prior to the commencement of the trial; and (b) The Court has available all necessary documents, properly organised into bundles, at the commencement of every trial. The rule requires the plaintiff to deliver bundles of documents to the Clerk of the Court for these purposes. 2. Order 34, rule 10 does not specify how, when or by whom the bundles of documents shall be prepared. This is a matter left to the parties to determine by agreement having regard to the circumstances of each individual case. 3. In cases involving a small number of documents (such as personal injury claims) it will normally be appropriate for all the documents to be included in the core bundles; for those bundles to be created by the plaintiff; and for them to be delivered to the defendant at the same time as they are delivered to the Clerk of the Court in accordance with rule 10(1). 4. In cases involving large numbers of documents, it would normally be appropriate for the parties' attorneys to make arrangements for those Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 documents to be indexed, paginated and put into bundles long before the plaintiff is required to deliver them to the Clerk of the Court. 5. It is the duty of the parties and their attorneys to make all such arrangements for the preparation and exchange of bundles of documents as may be appropriate, having regard to the circumstances of the case. The objective is to ensure that both parties have available to them bundles of all the documents (indexed, paginated and organised in the way in which they will be used at the trail) at such time as may be necessary to enable them to properly prepare their respective cases in time for the commencement of the trail. DATED this 7th day of March, 1996 HON. GEORGE HARRE Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Legal Aid Rules 1997 In accordance with Rule 5 of the Legal Aid Rules 1997, I have established the following Forms to be used for the purpose of the rules \u2013 1. Application for Criminal Legal Aid. 2. Statement of Means. 3. Application for Civil Legal Aid. 4. Criminal Legal Aid Certificate. 5. Civil Legal Aid Certificate. 6. Bill of costs. Copies of the Forms may be obtained from the Courts Office. MADE this 1st day of April, 1997. G.E. Harre Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 1 LEGAL AID RULES 1997 Application for Criminal Legal Aid 1. Name 2. Address 3. Have you already instructed an attorney?  If so, (a) Attorney's name (b) Attorney's address (c) Date upon which you instructed the attorney (d) Have you agreed to pay the attorney any fee? 4. The following documents are attached (a) Copy charges\/indictment (b) Statement means form 5. Do you intend to plead guilty or not guilty to all or any of the charges? I hereby apply for the grant of criminal legal aid in respect of the charges mentioned above on the grounds that I do not have the financial means to pay the cost of obtaining legal advice and representation. I hereby certify that the information contained in the attached statement of means is true, accurate and complete. _______________________          ______________________________ Applicant's signature Date GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 2 LEGAL AID RULES 1997 Statement of Means 1. Personal details .               Age: Name: Address: Marital status: Married Single Divorced 2. Details of children: Name Age 3. Details of other dependents: Name Relationship 4. Details of employment: Employer's name: Employer's Address: Your Job Specification: Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Amount of Wages: 5. If unemployed: Reason for unemployment: Amount of pension (if any): 6. Details of land owned: Registration details: Estimated value:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_7\", \"num\": \"7.\", \"text\": \"Details of savings: Name of bank: Account Nos:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_8\", \"num\": \"8.\", \"text\": \"Details of monthly expenses: Mortgage instalments: Rent: Utilities: Maintenance Orders: Loan instalments:\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_9\", \"num\": \"9.\", \"text\": \"Other relevant information: A separate sheet may be used if necessary. I declare that the details contained in this statement of means are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. ___________________________ ______________________ Applicant's signature Date Work Permit No. Registration Section Block Parcel Amount of Mortgage Balance: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 3 LEGAL AID RULES 1997 Application for Civil Legal Aid 1. Name 2. Address 3. Have you already instructed an attorney?  If so, state - (a) Attorney's name (b) Attorney's address (c) Date upon which you instructed the attorney (d) Have you agreed to pay the attorney any fee? 4. State full particulars of the proceedings which you intend to bring or which have been brought against you. (a) Cause No. (b) Opposing Parties (c) Nature of Proceedings 5. The following documents are attached (a) Documents served on me by the Plaintiff\/Applicant (if any) (b) A statement setting out the basis of my claim\/defence (c) An attorney's opinion (if any) (d) Statement means I hereby apply for civil legal aid to enable me to pursue the claim\/defend the proceedings (delete as applicable) described above on the grounds that my case has merit and I do not have the financial means to obtain legal advice and representation.  I hereby certify that the information contained in the attached statement of means is true, accurate and complete. ____________________________________ ________________________________ Applicant's signature Date Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 4 Criminal Legal Aid Certificate 1. Name 2. Address 3. Offences (Specify below the Scheduled Offences to which the certificate relates by reference to the charge numbers and\/or the indictment number and the relevant counts in the indictment) ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ 4. Attorneys I hereby certify that the above mentioned person is entitled to obtain legal advice and representation in respect of the scheduled offences specified above with effect from (specify the effective date which may not be earlier than the date upon which the applicant first instructed the attorney). ___________________________________ ____________________________ Judge\/Magistrate Date GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 CRIMINAL LEGAL AID CERTIFICATE NOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ASSISTED PERSONS 1. Attorney The Certificate specifies the attorney whom the assisted person is authorised to instruct.  The assisted person may not instruct any other attorney without the Court's consent. 2. Proceedings The Certificate specifies the charges in respect of which the assisted person is authorised to obtain legal advice and representation.  The assisted person may not seek advice about other charges without first obtaining the Court's consent. 3. Contributions If convicted of any of the charges specified in the certificate, the assisted person may be ordered to pay a contribution towards the cost of that assisted person\u2019s legal representation. 4. Bail Applications This certificate enables the assisted person to be represented on one bail application only unless with prior leave of the Court. 5. \\\"Mentions\\\" This certificate does not authorise the assisted person to instruct an attorney to appear when that assisted person\u2019s case is merely \\\"mentioned\\\" in Court. 6. Effective Date This is the date from which the certificate is effective and may be backdated to the date upon which the assisted person first instructed that assisted person\u2019s attorney. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 5 Civil Legal Aid Certificate 1. Name 2. Address 3. Attorney (See Note 1) 4. Proceedings 5. Conditions (See Note 3) 6. Effective Date (See Note 4) I hereby certify that the above mentioned person is authorised to seek and obtain legal advice and representation in respect of the proceedings or intended proceedings described above, subject to the limitations and conditions specified above. __________________________ ____________________________ Judge of the Grand Court Date GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 CIVIL LEGAL AID CERTIFICATE NOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ASSISTED PERSONS 1. Attorney The Certificate specifies the attorney whom the assisted person is authorised to instruct.  The assisted person may not instruct any other attorney without the Court's consent. 2. Proceedings The Certificate specifies the proceedings or intended proceedings in respect of which the assisted person is authorised to obtain legal advice and representation. The assisted person may not seek advice about the commencement or the defence of any other causes of action or proceedings, without first obtaining the Court's consent. 3. Conditions The Certificate specifies the limitations upon the assisted person's authority to seek legal advice and representation and the conditions, as to contributions and other matters, with which that assisted person must comply.  Contributions may be expressed as a fixed sum or a percentage of the total cost or a combination of both and may be payable by means of a lump sum or by instalments. 4. Effective Date This is the date from which the certificate is effective and may be backdated to the date upon which the assisted person first instructed that assisted person\u2019s attorney. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 6 Bill of Costs IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS CAUSE NO: ____ OF 20 [TITLE OF PROCEEDING] Bill of Costs to be Taxed Pursuant to The Legal Aid Rules 1997 Date Item Amount Claimed Amount Allowed Instructions on behalf of [state name] pursuant to a legal aid certificate dated [state date] [Set out a general description of the proceedings, the cause of action and the outcome.] [Then set out each item of work, the date on which it was done and the time engaged.] TOTAL CLAIMED: Signature of Attorney: TOTAL ALLOWED Signature of Taxing Officer: DATED this ______ day of _________________, 19____ GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 LEGAL AID TAXATION NOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ATTORNEYS 1. Every bill of costs must be in Form No. 6.  It must specify the legal aid certificate to which it relates; it must be stated in CI dollars; and it must be signed by the attorney named in the certificate or a partner of the firm named in the certificate.  Any disbursement incurred in a foreign currency must be translated into CI dollars. 2. The introduction to the bill of costs should describe the nature of the proceedings and include a short summary of the plaintiff's cause of action, the defendant's case and the final outcome.  The purpose of the introduction is to provide the taxing officer with a proper understanding of the proceeding without having to read the court file. 3. The main part of the bill of costs should comprise a detailed description of each item of work done; the date upon which it was done and the amount of attorney time expended in doing the work.  Time spent by paralegals, secretaries and messengers is not chargeable.  Such time is considered to be part of the attorney's overheads and is reflected in the hourly rate for work done by attorneys. 4. The applicable time unit is either 15 minutes for those attorneys using a manual time recording and accounting systems or 6 minutes for those attorneys using computerised time recording and accounting systems. 5. Whenever the item of work comprises the preparation or review of any pleading, affidavit or other document on the court file, it must be clearly described so that the taxing officer can easily identify it. 6. Time waiting at court in excess of an hour will normally be disallowed. 7. It is the duty of attorneys to maintain client files, timesheets and accounting records in a way which will enable them to produce a bill of costs expeditiously and economically.  Time spent by attorneys in preparing a bill of costs will normally be allowed at half the hourly rate specified in rule 17. 8. Attorneys must be prepared to verify the content of bills of costs by reference to client files, timesheets and accounting records.  All claims for disbursements, except telephone calls and photocopying charges, must be supported by receipts.  Attorneys must be prepared to produce telephone bills if required to do so by the taxing officer. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997 Register of Judgments and Register of Writs, etc. (GCR O.63, rr.7 and 8) 1.  GCR Order 63, rr.7 and 8 provide for the establishment of a register of judgments containing an office copy of every final judgment made or treated as having been made in open court and a register of writs and other originating process containing office copies of every writ, originating summons, originating motion or petition issued by the court. These registers are open to public inspection upon payment of the prescribed fees. 2.  The registers were created on 1st June, 1995 and contain office copies of judgments given and originating process issued only after that date. 3.  Any person wishing to obtain a copy of any judgment given in open court or any originating process issued prior to 1st June, 1995 should make application by letter addressed to the Clerk of the Court. Such application should specify the full title and cause number of the action in question. The Clerk of the Court will then arrange for copies to be obtained from the relevant court files as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible. MADE this 9th day of April, 1997. _______________________________ Hon. George Harre, Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997 Confidentiality and Publication of Chamber's Proceedings In the absence of local rules, the Cayman Islands practice for the reporting of proceedings heard in chambers is to be found in the English Administration of Justice Act 1960, s.12, with the addition of the provisions of this direction. Section 12 reads: \\\"(1) The publication of information relating to proceedings before any court sitting in private shall not itself be contempt of court except in the following cases, that is to say \u2013 (a)  where the proceedings relate to the wardship or adoption of an infant or wholly or mainly to the guardianship, custody, maintenance or upbringing of an infant, or rights of access to an infant; (b)  where the proceedings are brought under Part VIII of the Mental Health Act, 1959, or under any provision of that Act authorising an application or reference to be made to a Mental Health Review Tribunal or to a county court; (c)  where the court sits in private for reasons of national security during that part of the proceedings about which the information in question is published; (d)  where the information relates to a secret process, discovery or invention which is in issue in the proceedings; (e)  where the court (having power to do so) expressly prohibits the publication of all information relating to the proceedings or of information of the description which is published. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (2) Without prejudice to the foregoing subsection, the publication of the text or a summary of the whole or part of an order made by a court sitting in private shall not of itself be contempt of court except where the court (having power to do so) expressly prohibits the publication. (3) In this section references to a court include references to a judge and to a tribunal and to any person exercising the functions of a court, a judge or a tribunal; and references to a court sitting in private include references to a court sitting in camera or in chambers. (4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as implying that any publication is punishable as contempt of court which would not be so punishable apart from this section.\\\" In view of the sensitivity of many proceedings now routinely being brought in the commercial or civil jurisdiction of the Grand Court, the parties involved in any matters taken in chambers about which information might be published but for an express prohibition, are to be at liberty to apply for an order against or delimiting publication. Once the publication is made, it will then be in the discretion of the judge in the particular case to determine the ambit of publication. The publication of information relating to proceedings taken in chambers will not then of itself be a contempt of court unless it is contrary to the guidelines set out herein or contrary to a direction made by the judge in the case. The form below should be submitted by counsel prior to and certainly no later than the occasion of the delivery of the written ruling or judgment in any case in which the issue arises. It is preferable that the application be submitted in advance, particularly when a matter is pending decision, so that it may be reflected in the order, ruling or judgment. The use of the form will avoid the need for any separate application by way of summons in the cause. Notice of the submission of the form is to be given GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 to all sides. Unless it is necessary that counsel be heard in person (e.g. if any other party objects) the application may be submitted with written reasons, to be considered by the judge administratively and the decision notified in writing. 11th August 1997 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 (GCR O.1, r.12) Filing Documents in Court 1 Application and Commencement 1.1  This practice direction applies to all proceedings to which the Grand Court Rules have general application by virtue of O.1, r.2 and to all winding up proceedings. 1.2  It does not apply to- 1.2.1 proceedings governed by the Matrimonial Causes Rules (as amended and revised); 1.2.2 proceedings governed by the Grand Court (Bankruptcy) Rules (as amended and revised); and 1.2.3 appeals from civil proceedings in the Summary Court. 1.3 This practice direction shall come into force on 1st March, 1999 (\u201cthe Commencement Date\u201d). 2 Introduction 2.1 The Grand Court (Civil Procedure) Rules (as amended and revised) specifically required that all pleadings be filed. Although there was no similar requirement for affidavits and other documents to be filed, it became the established practice for all pleadings, affidavits, notices, lists and other documents to be filed whether or not they were actually used by the Court. 2.2 The rules relating to filing were materially changed with effect from 1st June, 1995, but the pre-existing practice has continued with the result that the Court office is accumulating a large volume of documents unnecessarily. The Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) required that the following documents shall be issued by or filed with the Court \u2014 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.2.1writs, originating summonses, originating motions and petitions (O.5, r.1); 2.2.2 third party notices (O.5, r.1 and O.16, r.3); 2.2.3 acknowledgements of service (O.12, r.4); 2.2.4 interlocutory summonses and notices of motion (O.32, r.2); 2.2.5 affidavits (including the exhibits) which are actually used in court (O.41, r.9); 2.2.6 judgements and orders (O.42, r.5); 2.2.7 applications for default judgements (O.42, r.6); 2.2.8 writs of execution (O.46, r.6); 2.2.9 notices of change, appointment, etc. of attorney (O.67, r.8). 2.3 No other documents are required to be filed, although it is the established practice to file all pleadings. GCR O.18 has been amended to require pleadings to be filed within 14 days after service. 2.4 The procedure for issuing writs (including writs of execution) and other forms of originating and interlocutory process involves filing an original document signed by or on behalf of the plaintiff or applicant. The procedure for drawing up and perfecting judgements and orders also involves filing an original document signed by the judge or stamped with a facsimile of the judge\u2019s signature. Acknowledgements of service and notices of change, etc. are required to be filed because they constitute notice both to the Court and to the parties. Affidavits only require to be filed if and when they are used in a cause or matter. 2.5 With effect from the Commencement Date, the practice relating to filing will be brought into line with the Rules as follows. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3 New Practice 3.1 Pleadings. The new GCR O.18 now requires that all pleadings be filed within 14 days after service. Pleadings are defined to mean statements of claim, defences, replies, counterclaims, defences to counterclaims, pleadings subsequent to reply (which may only be served with leave) and particulars of pleadings (but not the requests for particulars). It should be noted that the term \u201cpleadings\u201d does not include generally endorsed writs, summonses, motions or petitions, all of which do require to be filed as part of the procedure whereby they are issued. A writ which is specially endorsed with a statement of claim does constitute a pleading and requires to be filed as part of the procedure for issuing the writ. 3.2 Discovery. GCR O.24 requires that lists of documents, notices to produce documents, affidavits verifying lists, etc. shall be served. It does not require that any such documents shall be filed. 3.3 Interrogatories. Interrogatories and affidavits containing answers to interrogatories served in accordance with GCR O.26 shall not be filed. 3.4 Evidence for trial. The parties to actions commenced by writ are required or permitted by various rules to prepare and exchange written evidence in advance of the trial. GCR O.38 provides for the exchange of witness statements, expert reports and affidavits. GCR O.38 Part II comprises a code relating to the admission of hearsay evidence which involves the service of notices and counter-notices. GCR O.39 makes provision for evidence to be taken by deposition. No witness statements, affidavits, reports, depositions or notices served pursuant to these rules are required to be filed. 3.5 Affidavits. 3.5.1 Whether or not affidavits are required to be filed depends upon the purpose for which they are served. GCR O.41, r.9 provides that every affidavit used in a cause or matter must be filed. An affidavit GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 is only used within the meaning of this rule when it is read by the judge and constitutes part of the evidential basis upon which a judgement is given or an order is made. Affidavits which are sworn in compliance with orders (e.g., affidavits verifying lists of documents and affidavits made in compliance with asset disclosure orders) are required to be served but should not be filed because they are not intended to be used by the Court. 3.5.2 Whilst copies of affidavits sworn in connection with interlocutory applications are required to be served, the original affidavits are only required to be filed in accordance with GCR O.41, r.9 if the application is in fact contested with the result that such affidavits are read by the judge and constitute part of the evidential basis upon which the order is made. It follows that original affidavits need not be filed in advance of the hearing. 3.5.3 Written statements of evidence, whether in the form of affidavits, witness statements or depositions, intended to be used in evidence at trial are only required to be filed in the event that a trial takes place and such documents are in fact admitted in evidence. Since the vast majority of actions are settled, such documents should not be filed in anticipation of a trial taking place. 3.5.4 GCR O.41, r.9(2) requires that the exhibits to affidavits should not be filed. Copy exhibits need to be served and made available to the Judge in advance of the hearing but the original exhibits should be kept by the party\u2019s attorney and are not required to be filed. 3.6  Originating Summons Procedure. Affidavits sworn in compliance with GCR O.28 are required to be filed. 3.7  Petition and Originating Notice of Motion Procedure. Affidavits sworn in connection with petitions and originating (but not interlocutory) notices of motion require to be filed. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.8 Payment into Court. Notices relating to payment into court and acceptance of funds in court served pursuant to GCR O.22, rr.3 and 4 shall not be filed. Lodgement and payment schedules require to be delivered to the Court Funds Office but are not required to be filed on the Court file. 3.9 Voluntary Filing is not Permitted. With effect from the Commencement Date, the Clerk of the Court will not accept for filing any document which is not required to be filed under the Rules. 4 Preparing Interlocutory Applications and Trials 4.1 When preparing an interlocutory application, it shall be the duty of the applicant\u2019s attorney, after consultation with the attorneys for the other parties, to prepare and deliver to the relevant judge\u2019s secretary a bundle containing copies of all those pleadings, affidavits, etc. which are relevant to the application. Unless the application is both short and straightforward, such bundles should normally be delivered in advance of the hearing, preferably by the Thursday of the previous week. In the event that the hearing is vacated for whatever reason, the judge\u2019s bundle will be returned to the applicant\u2019s attorney and there will be no requirement for any part of it to be filed. In the event that the hearing takes place, the judge\u2019s bundle will be returned to the applicant\u2019s attorney after the judge has made that judge\u2019s order, but it shall be the duty of the parties\u2019 attorneys to file the originals of those affidavits read by the judge. 5 Correspondence Between Attorneys 5.1 Correspondence between the parties\u2019 attorneys should never be copied to the Court and will not be placed on court files. 5.2 Any such correspondence received by the Clerk of the Court will be destroyed. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6 Authorities 6.1 Lists of authorities and\/or bundles of copy authorities should be agreed between the parties\u2019 attorneys and sent to the Judge\u2019s secretary in advance of the hearing. 6.2 Neither lists of authorities, nor bundles of copy authorities, should be filed. DATED this 28th day of January, 1999. __________________________________ Honourable Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999 (GCR O.1, r.12) Drawing Up and Filing of Judgments and Orders (GCR O.42, r.5(4) and (5)) 1.  Every judgment or order should be dated with the date upon which it was made. A judgment or order is made when the judge pronounces it. 2.  The attorney responsible for drawing up a judgment or order should include the date upon which it was made in the draft which is presented for signature. Unsigned draft orders must be not be sealed. 3.  The date upon which a judgment or order is filed is the date upon which it is signed. After having been signed the judgment or order will be sealed with the Court seal and the date of filing will be inserted either by the judge themselves or a court official. MADE this 28th day of January, 1999. ______________________________________ Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC, Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999 INDICTMENTS 1. Application and Commencement 1.1 This practice direction applies to all committals for trial to the Grand Court in accordance with Part V of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) (the \\\"Code\\\"). 1.2 This practice direction shall come into force on 1st June 1999 (the \\\"commencement date\\\") 2. Introduction 2.1 Section 106 of the Code requires that a signed indictment be filed in the office of the Grand Court. 2.2 The Code specifies that a copy of the indictment shall be served on the accused at least three days before the day of the trial. There are no directions in the Code to specify when the indictment shall be filed. 3. New Practice 3.1 This Practice Direction requires that all indictments with the exception of those specified in paragraph 3.2 shall be filed in the office of the Clerk of the Court within seven days of the date of committal for trial. 3.2 Where the prosecution are unable to file an indictment within the seven days specified in paragraph 3.1 it shall be the duty of the prosecution to bring this to the attention of the Listing Officer of the Grand Court within seven days of the date of committal for trial. The Listing Officer will then fix a mention date for a judge to give directions. 4. Plea & Direction Forms 4.1 As a consequence of the above, plea and direction forms are to be filed by the defence within seven days of the filing of the indictment. Dated this 26th day of June 1999 Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 LEGAL AID FORMS - AFFIDAVIT OF MEANS In accordance with Rule 5 of the Legal Aid Rules 1997 an Affidavit of Means in the Form attached will be required of applicants for Legal Aid. Effective immediately, this Form of Affidavit of Means will be required in substitution for the Statement of Means prescribed by Practice Direction 1\/97 issued on 1 April 1997. Copies of the Form of Affidavit of Means may be obtained from the Courts Office. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice 27th October 1999 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form No. 2 LEGAL AID RULES 1997 Affidavit of Means I________________________ of ___________________________ Make oath and say as follows: The following details are a true statement of my financial means and I understand that it is an offence under the Poor Persons (Legal Aid) Act (as amended and revised) punishable by imprisonment or a fine to make a false statement. 1. Personal Details: Name:______________________________ Age:________________ Address:____________________________________________________ Marital status: Married \/ Single \/ Divorce \/ Separated 2. Details of Children: Name Age 3. Details of dependents: Name Relationship 4. Details of employment: Employer\u2019s name:      __________________________________ Employer\u2019s address: ___________________________________ Nature of employment: ________________________________ Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. (continued) Amount of wages CI$ _____________________ Per week\/month\/year Overtime\/bonus\/gratuities CI$ ______________ Per week\/month\/year Work Permit Number _____________________ 5. Details of other employment: Employer's name: _________________________________ Employer's address: _________________________________ Nature of employment: _______________________________ Amount of wages CI$ ____________________________ Per week\/month\/year Overtime\/bonus\/gratuities CI$ _____________________ Per week\/month\/year Work Permit Number _____________________ 6. I enclose proof of my earnings and saving accounts. 7. I am unemployed for the following reasons ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ My prospect of obtaining employment is as follows: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Details of other income (examples are affiliation\/maintenance\/property rental\/self employment\/pension) ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Details of savings\/checking accounts: Name of bank or other account Account number Balance GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_10\", \"num\": \"10.\", \"text\": \"Details of land owned: Registration Block Parcel Estimated Balance Mortgage Balance\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_11\", \"num\": \"11.\", \"text\": \"I have no other form of income or property.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_12\", \"num\": \"12.\", \"text\": \"Details of monthly expenses: Mortgage\/rent CI$ Utilities CI$ Maintenance Payments CI$ Loan Payments CI$ CI$ CI$ CI$\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_13\", \"num\": \"13.\", \"text\": \"Any other relevant information (A separate sheet may be used if necessary): Sworn to at George Town, Grand Cayman) this       day of                                             ) 20     before me                                           ) ) _________________________________ __________________________________ Justice of the Peace GCR 1995 (revised) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000 (GCR O.1, r.12) LISTING FORMS 1 Application and Commencement 1.1 This practice direction applies to- a.  all interlocutory applications made in any action begun by a writ or originating summons; b.  all applications governed by the Matrimonial Causes Rules, 1986 As Amended, except for undefended divorce petitions; c.  all applications made in connection with bankruptcy and winding up proceedings, except for the hearing of a creditor\u2019s winding up petition; d.  the trial of all actions begun by originating summons; e.  the trial of all applications for judicial review, applications for writs of habeus corpus and appeals to the Grand Court governed by GCR O.55 and 56; and f.  any other application (not being one specified in paragraph 1.2) in respect of which the Listing Officer requires a Listing Form to be completed. 1.2 This practice direction shall not apply to \u2014 a.  the trial of actions begun by writ in respect of which GCR O.34 continues to apply; b.  undefended divorce petitions; c.  creditors\u2019 winding up petitions; d.  applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal; e.  appeals from the Summary Court; and f.  applications under Section 4 of the Confidential Information Disclosure Act (as amended and revised). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1.3 This practice direction shall come into force on 3rd January, 2000. 2 Introduction 2.1 The position of \u201cListing Officer\u201d was created to ensure efficient use of court time. The Listing Officer\u2019s ability to carry out this function is directly related to the information provided by attorneys regarding their cases. When case information is incomplete, listing difficulties arise. 3 New Practice 3.1 As a consequence of the above, all requests for court dates must be accompanied by a completed Listing Form. 4 Listing Form 4.1 The Listing Form shall be in Practice Form 1\/00. 4.2 In the case of any ex parte application or any proceeding begun by petition, the Listing Form shall be completed by the attorneys acting for the applicant or petitioner as the case may be. 4.3 In the case of any inter partes application or the trial of any originating summons in respect of which the respondent has filed a notice of intention to defend, the listing form shall be completed and signed by the attorneys acting for both the applicant and all the respondents. Dated this _____ day of December, 1999. ___________________________________ The Hon. Chief Justice Anthony Smellie Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 (GCR O.1, r.l2) GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS (GCR O.62, r. 17) 1. Introduction 1.1 These Guidelines are made pursuant to GCR Order 62, rule 17 and are intended to be a comprehensive code relating to the procedure in respect of taxation; the form and content of bills of costs; and the nature and amount of fees, charges, disbursements, expenses, or remuneration which may be allowed on taxation. 1.2 These Guidelines have no application to bills of costs relating to work done before 1st January 2002, (\\\"the Commencement Date\\\") which will be taxed in accordance with the schedule to the Grand Court (Taxation of Costs) Rules 1995. 1.3 Where an order for costs relates to work done both before and after the Commencement Date, it will normally be appropriate to prepare two separate bills of costs. 1.4 Words and expressions used in these Guidelines shall have the meaning ascribed to them by GCR O.1, r.7 and GCR O.62, r.3 as the case may be. 1.5 These Guidelines apply both to taxations on the standard basis and taxations on the indemnity basis. The only distinction between a taxation on this basis is (a) the difference in the burden of proof and (b) the application of maximum hourly rates for attorneys\u2019 fees in the case of taxations on the standard basis. 2. Structure of a bill of costs 2.1 A bill of costs should distinguish between legal fees and disbursements. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.2. A bill of costs may be drawn up in CI$ or US$ (referred to as \\\"the currency of the bill\\\"). Costs incurred in any other currency must be translated into the currency of the bill at the exchange rate ruling on the date of the bill. The CI$\/US$ exchange rate is fixed at 0.82. 2.3 The bill should contain an introduction which describes the nature of the litigation sufficient to enable the taxing officer to gain a proper understanding 2.4 The work done and disbursements incurred should be itemised and set out chronologically. 2.5 The lawyers engaged should be identified sufficiently to enable the taxing officer to determine the appropriate hourly rate(s) for work done by each of them. 2.6 Each item of work done should be described. The number of hours worked on each item by each lawyer or paralegal should be stated, together with the applicable hourly rates. 2.7 The bill should be divided into five columns as follows: (a)  Column 1 should contain the item number. (b) Column 2 should contain a description of each item of work arranged chronologically; the date(s) on which or period(s) during which it was done; the identity of the person(s) doing the work; the time spent; and the applicable hourly rates. (c)  Column 3 should contain the total amount claimed in respect of the item. (d)  Column 4 is for use by the paying party and should be left blank. (e)  Column 5 is for use by the taxing officer and should be left blank. 2.8 When the item comprises a disbursement it should be described in Column 2 and the amount claimed should be stated in Column 3. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.9 Whenever possible, the paying party's response should be summarised in Column 4. The word \\\"Agreed\\\" should be inserted to indicate that the item and the amount claimed in respect of it are agreed in all respects. \\\"Not agreed\\\" shall be taken to mean that the item should be disallowed in toto. The paying party may insert a lower dollar amount to indicate that the amount claimed should be reduced because the time spent is excessive and\/or the hourly rate(s) is excessive. 2.10 A brief explanation of the paying party's objection should be included in Column 4. 2.11 Where appropriate, the paying party should explain or elaborate upon that party\u2019s objection by a separate statement in writing. 2.12 The taxing officer will insert in Column 5 the amount allowed in respect of each item. 2.13 The successful party's bill of costs must contain a declaration signed by that party\u2019s attorney to the effect that (a) the bill is accurate and complete; and (b) the amount sought in the bill does not exceed the successful party\u2019s incurred costs. 2.14 Having completed Column 4, the paying party's attorney must also sign the bill of costs. 2.15 Wherever possible, copies of bills of costs should be served in the form of a computer disk or by e-mail. 3. Procedure for serving and lodging bills of costs 3.1 The successful party must serve that party\u2019s bill of costs on the paying party personally or upon the paying party\u2019s attorney. 3.2 Where more than one party is liable jointly or severally to pay the whole or part of the costs, a copy of the bill of costs shall be served on every paying party. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.3 Unless the bill of costs is exceptionally long or complex, the paying party should complete Column 4 and return it to the successful party within 21 days. 3.4 Unless the total amount payable is agreed, the successful party must lodge the bill of costs for taxation within 14 days of receiving it back from the paying party. 3.5 If the paying party fails to respond within 21 days or such longer period as may be agreed between the parties or allowed by the taxing officer, the successful party may apply for a default costs certificate. 3.6 The paying party may not participate in a taxation unless and until the paying party has completed Column 4 of the bill of costs. 4. Procedure on taxation 4.1 A taxation shall be inquisitorial in nature. 4.2 The taxing officer shall control the procedure applicable to each taxation which will not necessarily involve any oral hearing. 4.3 The taxing officer will investigate each item in the bill of costs unless it is agreed and determine what amount, if any, shall be allowed in respect of it. 4.4 If the paying party has failed to complete Column 4 of the bill of costs or failed to respond to any particular item within the prescribed time limit, the taxing officer will proceed to taxation on the assumption that the bill or particular item, as the case may be, is \\\"Agreed\\\". 4.5 The taxing officer will require the successful party to justify each item in whatever way appears to the taxing officer to be appropriate. The successful party may be required to give an oral explanation and\/or make written submissions and\/or produce supporting documents of the kind referred to in rule 30(3). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4.6 For the purposes of justifying a bill of costs no distinction is to be drawn between work done by foreign lawyers and that done by local attorneys. Original files belonging to foreign lawyers must be produced if required by the taxing officer, failing which the amount claimed will be disallowed. 4.7 The taxing officer may require the production of files or individual documents which are privileged, but the taxing officer should not disclose them to the paying party. 4.8 The taxing officer will require the paying party to justify the paying party\u2019s objections to the bill of costs in whatever way appears to the taxing officer to be appropriate. The paying party may be required to explain the paying party's objections in writing and\/or make oral submissions to the taxing officer. 4.9 The successful party will be required to produce to the taxing officer and disclose to the paying party all necessary invoices and receipts in respect of the disbursements claimed in the bill of costs. The successful party may also be required to produce the actual invoices rendered by the successful party\u2019s attorney and foreign lawyers and to reconcile the amount claimed in the bill of costs with the amount specified in the invoices. 5. Procedure for Taxation of Costs Payable out of a Fund 5.1 When the costs of a trustee, personal representative or official liquidator are ordered to be paid out of a fund and taxed on the indemnity basis, the Bill of Costs should be prepared in accordance with Section 2 of these Guidelines. 5.2 The Bill of Costs should be served on the person (if any) designated for this purpose, such as a representative beneficiary in the case of costs payable out of a trust fund or the creditors' committee in the case of costs payable out of the assets of an insolvent company. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.3 In cases where the trustee, personal representative or official liquidator is required to serve their Bill of Costs, that person may apply for a default costs certificate or a certificate for costs in an agreed amount as may be appropriate. 5.4 In any other case, the trustee personal representative or official liquidator must make an application for taxation, in which case the procedure contained in Section 4 of these Practice Directions will apply. 6. Disbursements 6.1 An expense may be claimed as a disbursement on taxation if: (a)  it was reasonably and properly incurred by the successful party's attorney in the course of conducting the proceedings; and (b)  it is not an expense of a kind which is customarily included in the overheads reflected in attorneys\u2019 hourly rates and is therefore deemed to be reflected in the hourly rates charged by the successful party's attorney. 6.2 The amount claimed in respect of any disbursement shall not exceed the actual amount paid by the successful party who may be required to produce a receipt or other documents evidencing the amount paid. 6.3 Notwithstanding paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 above, the following sums may be claimed as disbursements: (a)  photocopying charges - up to 50\u00a2 per page; (b)  printing charges - up to 50\u00a2 per page; (c)  telephone and fax charges - the amount of the call charge plus a mark up not exceeding 20%; (d)  transcripts produced by court reporters - up to CI$3.50 per page. 6.4 Legal fees paid to foreign lawyers cannot be claimed as disbursements unless the foreign lawyer is engaged to give an opinion on a point of foreign law which is in issue in the proceedings. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.5 Admission fees and work permit fees paid in respect of foreign lawyers are not recoverable on taxation on the basis that such expenses are part of the overheads reflected in the foreign lawyer's hourly rates. 6.6 Work permit fees paid in respect of expert witnesses are recoverable. 7. Attorney's fees 7.1 The amount of attorney's fees allowable on taxation on the standard basis shall be determined on the basis of time spent. The unit of time used in a bill of costs may be 1\/10 hour or \u00bc hour. 7.2 Amounts claimed on the basis of brief fees, refreshers, lump sums, percentages, conditional fee agreements, contingency agreements or any basis other than hourly rates will be disallowed. 7.3 In the case of taxations on the standard basis, the hourly rates to be applied will be determined on the basis of the post qualification experience of the persons engaged as follows: More than 15 years Up to CI$300 or US$365 Between 10 and 15 years Up to CI$275 or US$335 Between 5 and 10 years Up to CI$250 or US$305 Less than 5 years Up to CI$150 or US$185 Articled Clerks and Paralegals UP to CI$ 90 or US$110 These are maximum rates. The taxing officer may, in the exercise of the taxing officer\u2019s discretion, determine that lower rates are appropriate in any particular case. The number of years postqualification experience shall be reckoned from the date upon which the attorney was first admitted to practice as a professional lawyer either in the Cayman Islands or elsewhere. King\u2019s Counsel shall be treated as attorneys having more than 15 years post qualification experience. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7.4  In the case of taxations on the indemnity basis, the hourly rate or scale of rates will be that agreed between the attorney and that attorney\u2019s client provided that such rate or scale is not unreasonable. The mere fact that the agreed rate is higher than the maximum rate(s) allowable on a taxation on the standard basis shall not be regarded as evidence that it is unreasonable. 7.5  In determining the amount allowable in respect of each item in a bill of costs the taxing officer shall have regard to both the experience of the person undertaking the work and the nature of the work undertaken. For example, work done by an attorney of more than 15 years experience which could equally well have been done by a paralegal or junior attorney will be allowed at the appropriate lower hourly rate. However, the taxing officer will take into account that routine tasks done by paralegals and junior attorneys need to be directed and supervised by experienced attorneys. 7.6 Work done by articled clerks or trainees is not recoverable on taxation unless it is work of a kind which would normally be done by paralegals. 7.7 The cost of routine typing and file maintenance done by secretaries comprises part of the overheads reflected in the hourly rates for attorneys and is therefore not recoverable on taxation. 7.8 The cost of organising, cataloguing and filing documents for the purposes of discovery, inspection and\/or trial is recoverable on taxation. 8. Work done by persons other than attorneys 8.1 Legal work done by \\\"in-house counsel\\\" who are in the employment of the successful party is not normally recoverable on taxation. It will only be recoverable if the successful party can satisfy the taxing officer that it is work of a kind which would otherwise be done by outside lawyers. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 For example, the work involved in instructing outside lawyers is not recoverable; time spent receiving and considering advice from outside lawyers is not recoverable; but time spent preparing a draft list of documents under the supervision of outside lawyers may be recoverable. 8.2 Investigative and other work done by non-lawyers will be recoverable on taxation only to the extent that the Court has given a direction pursuant to rule 18 that it should be allowed. 9. Travelling and hotel expenses 9.1 Reasonable travelling expenses incurred in bringing witnesses to the Islands or between the Islands shall be recoverable on taxation. 9.2 Reasonable expenses incurred by witnesses travelling within Grand Cayman or within Cayman Brac shall not be recoverable on taxation. 9.3 Reasonable hotel expenses incurred in accommodating witnesses during a hearing shall be recoverable on taxation, not exceeding US$250 per day. Only the accommodation element of the hotel charges may be recovered. 9.4 Travelling and hotel expenses paid to foreign lawyers shall not be recoverable on taxation. 10. Service of process 10.1 The cost of serving process out of the jurisdiction is recoverable as a disbursement. 10.2 The cost of effecting personal service on an individual within the jurisdiction is recoverable at the rate specified in Schedule 3 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) whether the successful party employs the bailiff or a private process server. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 10.3 The cost of serving process on the registered office of a company or upon a party's attorney and the cost of filing documents at court is not recoverable on the basis that the cost of employing messengers is part of the overheads reflected in the attorney's hourly rates. Issued by The Rules Committee on the 22nd day of October, 2001. The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice The Hon. David Ballantyne, Attorney General Andrew J. Jones, Esq., Legal Practitioner Alden M. McLaughlin, Esq., Legal Practitioner Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004 (GCR O.1, r. 12) CORRECTIONS TO JUDGMENTS 1.  Unless the judge otherwise sees fit, copies of written judgments will now be made available before being released as finally approved to facilitate the following: 1.1 To enable the attorneys of the parties to consider the judgment and decide what consequential orders they should seek. In appropriate cases the judge may impose conditions of confidentiality until the judgment is finally released or until the formal order is finally issued. 1.2 To enable the attorneys of the parties to submit any written suggestions to the judge about typing errors, wrong references of fact or citation of authority or other minor corrections of that kind in good time, so that, if the judge thinks fit, the judgment can be corrected before it is finally handed down in open Court or Chambers. 2.  The same will apply to reasons for judgments. 3.  Written suggestions for changes must be submitted within 72 hours of the release of the judgment or reasons for judgment; unless the judge otherwise directs in writing. 4.  Judgments or reasons for judgments released on the foregoing basis will on every page be stamped: \u201cUnapproved version: No permission is granted to publicise, copy, or use in Court\u201d. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.  None of the foregoing is intended to affect the discretion of the judge to issue errata in respect of written judgments or reasons for judgments for errors which later come to the judge\u2019s attention but within a reasonable time after the formal delivery (for example, errors which may be identified by the editors of the Law Reports). The intention is that any such errata will be given within 4 weeks of the formal release of the judgment or reasons for judgment and will immediately be notified to the attorneys and publishers of the Law Reports upon being given. Dated this 17th day of March 2004 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC, Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 PROCEEDINGS BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL 1. Introduction 1.1 This practice direction applies to all applications seeking the sanction of the Court for the use of video conferencing (VCF). 1.2 The purpose of this practice direction is to explain and clarify certain procedures and arrangements necessary in this relatively new method of taking evidence in trials or in other parts of any legal proceedings, for example, interim application case management conferences and pre-trial reviews. Further guidance is given in the Video Conferencing Guide appended to this practice direction. 1.3 VCF equipment may be used both (a) in a courtroom, whether via equipment which is permanently placed there or via a mobile unit, and (b) in a separate studio or conference room. In either case, the location at which the judge sits is referred to as the \u201clocal site\u201d. The other site or sites to and from which transmission is made are referred to as \u201cthe remote site\u201d and in any particular case any such site may be another courtroom. 2. Preliminary Arrangements 2.1. The Court\u2019s permission is required for any part of any proceedings to be dealt with by means of VCF. Before seeking a direction, the applicant should notify the listing officer or other appropriate court officer of the intention to seek it, and should enquire as to the availability of court VCF equipment for the day or days of the proposed VCF. 2.2  The application should be made to any of the Judges of the Grand Court. If all parties consent to a direction, permission can be sought 1 See later amendments to the Evidence Law in 2004. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 by letter, fax or e-mail, although the Court may still require an oral hearing. All parties are entitled to be heard on whether or not such a direction should be given and as to its terms. If a witness at a remote site is to give evidence by an interpreter, consideration should be given at this stage as to whether the interpreter should be at the local site or the remote site. 2.3  If a VCF direction is given, arrangements for the transmission will then need to be made. The Court will ordinarily direct that the party seeking permission to use VCF is to be responsible for this. That party is hereafter \u2013 in civil cases \u2013 referred to as \u201cthe VCF arranging party\u201d. 2.4  The VCF arranging party must contact the listing officer or other appropriate officer of the court and make arrangements for the VCF transmission. Details of the remote site, and of the equipment to be used both at the local site (if not being supplied by the Court) and the remote site (including the number of ISDN lines and connection speed), together with all the necessary contact names and telephone numbers, will have to be provided to the listing officer or other court officer. The Court will need to be satisfied that any equipment provided by the parties for use at the local site and also that at the remote site is of sufficient quality for a satisfactory transmission. 3. Costs 3.1  Subject to any order to the contrary, all costs of the transmission, including the costs of hiring equipment and technical personnel to operate it, will initially be the responsibility of, and must be met by, the VCF arranging party. All reasonable efforts should be made to keep the transmission to a minimum and so keep the costs down. All such costs will be considered to be part of the costs of the proceedings and the Court will determine at such subsequent time as is convenient or appropriate who, as between the parties, should be responsible for them and (if appropriate) in what proportions. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. Recording 4.1  The VCF arranging party must arrange for recording equipment to be provided by the Court so that the evidence may be recorded at the local site. 4.2  Application for a direction from the Court must be made for the provision of recording equipment at the remote site by the arranging party. 4.3  No other recording may be made of any proceedings via VCF, save as directed by the Court. Dated this 26th day of May 2004 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 VIDEO CONFERENCING GUIDE This guidance is for the use of video conferencing (VCF) in civil proceedings. It is in part based upon the protocol of the Federal Court of Australia and CPR 32 Practice Direction of the Courts of England and Wales. It is intended to provide a guide to all persons involved in the use of VCF, although it does not attempt to cover all the practical questions that may arise. VIDEO CONFERENCING GENERALLY 1.  VCF may be a convenient way of dealing with any part of proceedings: it can involve considerable savings in time and cost. Its use for the taking of evidence from overseas witnesses will, in particular, be likely to achieve a material saving of costs, and such savings may also be achieved by its use for taking domestic evidence. It is, however, inevitably not as ideal as having the witness physically present in court. Its convenience should not therefore be allowed to dictate its use. A judgment must be made in every case in which the use of VCF is being considered not only as to whether it will achieve an overall cost saving, but as to whether its use will be likely to be beneficial to the efficient, fair and economic disposal of the litigation. In particular, it needs to be recognised that the degree of control a court can exercise over a witness at the remote site is or may be more limited than it can exercise over a witness physically before it. 2.  When used for the taking of evidence, the objective should be to make the VCF session as close as possible to the usual practice in a trial court where evidence is taken in open court. To gain the maximum benefit, several differences have to be taken into account. Some matters, which are taken for granted when evidence is taken in the conventional way, take on a different dimension when it is taken by VCF: for example, the administration of the oath, ensuring that the witness understands who is at the local site and what their various roles are, the raising of any objections to the evidence and the use of the documents. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.  It should be presumed that all foreign governments are willing to allow their nationals or others within their jurisdiction to be examined before a court on the Cayman Islands by means of VCF. If there is any doubt about this, enquiries should be directed to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (International Legal Matters Unit, Consular Division) with a view to ensuring that the country from which the evidence is to be taken raises no objection to it at diplomatic level. The VCF arranging party will be required to make all necessary inquiries about this well in advance of the VCF and must be able to inform the court what those inquiries were and of their outcome. 4.  Time zone differences need to be considered when a witness abroad is to be examined in Cayman via VCF. The convenience of the witness, the parties, their representatives and the court must all be taken into account. The cost of the use of a commercial studio is usually greater outside normal working hours. 5.  Those involved with VCF need to be aware that, even with the most advanced systems currently available, there are the briefest of delays between the receipt of the picture and that of the accompanying sound. If due allowance is not made for this, there will be a tendency to \u201cspeak over\u201d the witness, whose voice will continue to be heard for a millisecond or so after that witness appears on the screen to have finished speaking. 6.  With current technology, picture quality is good, but not as good as television picture. The quality of the picture is enhanced if those appearing on VCF monitors keep their movements to a minimum. PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS 7.  The VCF arranging party must ensure that an appropriate person will be present at the local site to supervise the operation of the VCF throughout the transmission in order to deal with any technical problems. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8.  It is recommended that the judge, practitioners and witness should arrive at their respective VCF sites about 20 minutes prior to the scheduled commencement of the transmission. 9. If the local site is not a courtroom, but a conference room or studio, the judge will need to determine who is to sit where. The VCF arranging party must take care to ensure that the number of microphones is adequate for the speakers and that the panning of the camera for the practitioners\u2019 table encompass all legal representatives so that the viewer can see everyone seated there. 10. The proceedings, wherever they may take place, form part of a trial to which the public is entitled to have access (unless the court has determined that they should be heard in private). If the local site is to be a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party must ensure that it provides sufficient accommodation to enable a reasonable number of members of the public to attend. 11. In cases where the local site is a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party should make arrangements, if practicable, for the Royal Coat of Arms to be placed above the judge\u2019s seat. 12. In cases where the VCF is to be used for the taking of evidence, the VCF arranging party must arrange for recording equipment to be provided by the court so that the evidence can be recorded. An associate will normally be present to operate the recording equipment when the local site is a courtroom. The VCF arranging party should take steps to ensure that an associate is present to do likewise when it is a studio or conference room. The equipment should be set up and tested before the VCF transmission. It will often be a valuable safeguard for the VCF arranging party also to arrange for the provision of recording equipment at the remote site. This will provide a useful back-up if there is any reduction in sound quality during the transmission. A direction from the court for the making of such a back-up recording must, however, be obtained first. This is because the proceedings are court proceedings and, save as directed by the court no other recording of them must be made. The court will direct what is to happen to the back-up recording. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 13. Some countries may require that any oath or affirmation to be taken by a witness accord with local custom rather than the usual form of oath or affirmation used in the Cayman Islands. The VCF arranging party must make all appropriate prior enquiries and put in place all arrangements necessary to enable the oath or affirmation to be taken in accordance with local custom. That party must be in a position to inform the court what those inquiries were, what their outcome was and what arrangements have been made. If the oath or affirmation can be administered in the manner normal in the Cayman Islands, the VCF arranging party must arrange in advance to have the appropriate holy book at the remote site. The associate will normally administer the oath.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_14\", \"num\": \"14.\", \"text\": \"Consideration will need to be given in advance to the documents to which the witness is likely to be referred. The parties should endeavour to agree on this. It will usually be most convenient for a bundle of the copy documents to be prepared in advance, which the VCF arranging party should then send to the remote site.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_15\", \"num\": \"15.\", \"text\": \"Additional documents are sometimes quite properly introduced during the course of a witness\u2019s evidence. To cater for this, the VCF arranging party should ensure that equipment is available to enable the documents to be transmitted between sites during the course of the VCF transmission. Consideration should be given to whether to use a document camera. If it is decided to use one, arrangements for its use will need to be established in advance. The panel operator will need to know the number and size of documents or objects if their images are to be sent by document camera. In many cases, a simpler and sufficient alternative will be to ensure that there are fax transmission and reception facilities at the participating sites. THE HEARING\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_16\", \"num\": \"16.\", \"text\": \"The procedure for conducting the transmission will be determined by the Judge. The Judge will determine who is to control the cameras. In cases where the VCF is being used for an application in the course of GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the proceedings, the Judge will ordinarily not enter the local site until both sites are online. Similarly, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Judge will ordinarily leave the local site while both sites are still on line. The following paragraphs apply primarily to cases where the VCF is being used for the taking of the evidence of a witness at a remote site. In all cases, the judge will need to decide whether court dress is appropriate when using VCF facilities. It might be appropriate when transmitting from courtroom to courtroom. It might not be when a commercial facility is being used.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_17\", \"num\": \"17.\", \"text\": \"At the beginning of the transmission, the Judge will probably wish to introduce themselves and the advocates to the witness. The Judge will probably want to know who is at the remote site and will invite the witness to introduce themselves and anyone else who is with them. The Judge may wish to give directions as to the seating arrangements at the remote site so that those present are visible at the local site during the taking of the evidence. The Judge will probably wish to explain to the witness the method of taking the oath or of affirming, the manner in which the evidence is taken, and who will be conducting the examination and cross-examination. The Judge will probably also wish to inform the witness of the matters referred to in paragraph 5 and 6 above (co-ordination of picture with sound, and picture quality).\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_18\", \"num\": \"18.\", \"text\": \"The examination of the witness at the remote site should follow as closely as possible the practice adopted when a witness is in the courtroom. During examination, cross-examination and reexamination, the witness must be able to see the legal representative asking the question and also any other person (whether another legal representative or the judge) making any statements in regard to the witness\u2019 evidence. It will in practice be most convenient if everyone remains seated throughout the transmission. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006 (GCR O. 42) ORDERS Orders that are not encompassed by GCR O. 42, r. 5(5) or 5A should be in the following format: Under the style of cause: \u201cIN CHAMBERS\/IN GRAND COURT DATE OF ORDER BEFORE HON. JUSTICE ORDER UPON hearing counsel for the applicant etc. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: DATED the FILED the _______________________ JUDGE OF THE GRAND COURT\u201d And on a separate page, not forming part of the order: Approved as to form and content: etc.\u201d Orders that are encompassed by GCR O. 42, r. 5(5) or 5A should include the indorsement \u201cApproved as to form and content\u201d after the signature line of the Clerk of the Court as the indorsement forms part of the order. Dated this 24th day of October 2006 Hon. Anthony Smellie, Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008 (GCR O.1,r.12) REGISTER OF JUDGEMENTS - REGISTER OF WRITS (GCR O.63, rr. 7 & 8) 1.  The Register of Judgements and the Register of Writs and other originating process are open to public inspection. The purpose of this rule is that the existence of all legal proceedings, including the identity of the parties and the general nature of the causes of action, and the manner in which the Court finally adjudicated upon those proceedings should be a matter of public record. 2.  It is therefore important that the information filed on these registers is both complete and accurate. 3.  The Clerk of the Court has been instructed to ensure that all final judgements and orders are placed on the Register, including default judgements and consent orders in respect of which there are no written reasons. 4.  Whenever a writ, petition, originating summons and originating motion is amended, the amended pleading must also be placed on the Register, otherwise readers are likely to be misled about the identity of the parties and\/or the true nature of the causes of action. For the same reason, counterclaims and third party notices are required to be placed on the Register. The Clerk of the Court has been instructed to ensure that all pleadings by which new causes of action and\/or new parties are or may be added, are placed on the Register, including amended pleadings, counterclaims and third party notices. Dated this 31st day of October 2008 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC, Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 (GCR O.1, r.12) SCHEMES OF ARRANGEMENT AND COMPROMISE UNDER SECTION 86 OF THE COMPANIES ACT (GCR O.102, r.20) 1 Introduction 1.1 This practice direction supersedes Practice Direction No.1 of 2002 (issued on 4th July 2002) which is hereby revoked. 1.2 The sole purpose of replacing Practice Direction No.1 of 2002 is to provide more detailed directions and guidance about matters which will be considered by the Court at the first hearing of a petition for an order sanctioning a scheme of arrangement. Practitioners are referred in particular to paragraphs 3.1 to 3.5 below. 1.3 This practice direction will apply to proceedings commenced and\/or hearings taking place on or after 1st October 2010. 2 Commencing proceedings 2.1 The previous practice of the Court, whereby the applications for an order convening the Court meeting and the sanction of the scheme of arrangement were treated as two entirely separate proceedings, was abolished by Practice Direction No.1\/2002. These applications will continue be made in the same proceeding, thus resulting in the creation of a single Court file. 2.2 The proceeding will be commenced by petition seeking the Court\u2019s sanction of a proposed scheme of arrangement or compromise. At the same time as filing a petition, the applicant must file an interlocutory summons for an order convening the Court meeting(s). As part of the directions given on this application, the Court will fix a date for the substantive hearing of the petition, notice of which will be given to the shareholders\/creditors as part of the scheme documentation. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.3  Within seven days after the Court meeting(s) has or have been held, the applicant must file an affidavit sworn by the Chairperson of the meeting(s) verifying that notice was duly sent in accordance with the order for directions; that the meeting(s) was or were duly held; and giving particulars of the result. In the event that the scheme was not approved, the applicant will also formally ask for the petition to be dismissed. In the event that the scheme was approved, the substantive hearing of the petition will take place on the pre-determined date. In most cases it should be unnecessary to file any further evidence. 3 Matters to be determined at the first Hearing 3.1  The first hearing (on the interlocutory summons for an order to convene the Court meeting) will normally be heard ex parte, but practitioners should consider giving notice to persons affected by the scheme in cases where class or other issues as referred to in paragraph 3.3 below arise, and where it is practical to do so. Such notice should include a statement of the intention to promote the scheme and of its purpose, and also of the proposed composition of classes and of the intention to raise any issue as referred to in paragraph 3.3 below. 3.2 In every case the Court will consider whether it is appropriate to convene class meetings and, if so, the composition of the classes so as to ensure that each meeting consists of shareholders or creditors whose rights against the company which are to be released or varied under the scheme, or the new rights which the scheme gives in their place, are not so dissimilar as to make it impossible for them to consult together with a view to their common interest. It follows that the supporting affidavit must contain all such information as may be necessary to enable the Court to make this determination. The applicant should also raise at the first hearing any other matter which may affect the conduct of the meeting(s). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.3 At the first hearing, the Court will also consider any other issue which is relevant to the jurisdiction of the Court to sanction the scheme, and any other issue which, although not strictly going to jurisdiction, is such that it would unquestionably lead the Court to refuse to sanction the scheme. 3.4 It is the responsibility of the applicant by evidence in support of the application or otherwise to draw the attention of the Court to any issue in relation to the meeting(s) or any issue in paragraph 3.3 above. Unless the applicant\u2019s case in relation to the meeting(s) or any issue in paragraph 3.3 above is a plain and obvious one, the applicant\u2019s counsel should provide the Court with a skeleton argument addressing the relevant issues. 3.5 The Court will, if necessary, give directions for the resolution of any such issues including, if necessary, directions for the postponement of meeting(s) until that resolution has been achieved, and will hear interested parties. The Court will expect any person who raises any such issue at the hearing to sanction the scheme to show good cause why they did not raise it at an earlier stage. 3.6 The Court will consider whether the proposed time and place of the Court meeting(s) and the method of giving notice is appropriate in all the circumstances. The test is whether the parties having the economic interest, which is typically not the registered holder of the shares or debt instruments, will have sufficient time in which to consider the scheme documentation and make an informed decision. Where necessary, the Court should be provided with evidence of the \u201cshareholder\/creditor profile\u201d. In cases where the relevant shares or debt instruments are listed on a stock exchange, the Court must be provided with all necessary evidence upon which to satisfy itself that the proposed notice period and method of giving notice will comply with applicable rules. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.7 The applicant must satisfy the Court that the scheme documentation will provide the shareholder\/creditor (which for this purpose means the person having the ultimate economic interest) with all the information reasonably necessary to enable them to make an informed decision about the merits of the proposed scheme. Since this application will typically be made ex parte, the applicant\u2019s counsel must draw the Court\u2019s attention to any aspects of the explanatory memorandum or proxy statement which might arguably depart from best practice. 3.8 If the proposed scheme relates to shares or debt instruments which are listed on a stock exchange, the applicant must file evidence which sets out the relevant listing rules and practice and explains the steps which have been or will be taken to comply with such listing rules or practice. The Court will always require to know whether the proposed explanatory memorandum or proxy statement requires the approval of the relevant stock exchange and, if so, whether such approval has been obtained. 3.9 If one of the proposed class meetings consists of a small number of persons who are all willing to be bound by the terms of the scheme, the Court may, in its discretion, waive the requirement for a formal class meeting to be held of that particular class if the evidence before it at the first hearing shows that all of the particular members in question consent to be bound by the terms of the scheme. 4 \u201cLooking through the Register\u201d 4.1  GCR O.102, r.20 (6) confirms the existing practice of the Court which is to \u201clook through the Register\u201d in appropriate cases for the purpose of determining whether or not the statutory majorities have been achieved. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4.2  In the past there has been some uncertainty about the way in which the Court will interpret and apply the statutory provisions in cases where the whole or substantially the whole of the relevant shares are registered with custodians or clearing houses such as Euroclear and Clearstream Luxembourg (previously known as Cedel). In the case of schemes involving creditors, similar uncertainty has arisen in cases where the scheme relates to a global note and where the whole of the debt instruments are registered with a single trustee. In such cases the Court will \u201clook through the register\u201d for the purpose of determining whether or not the statutory majorities have been achieved and any necessary directions for this purpose will be given at the hearing of the interlocutory summons. 4.3 For example, the Court may direct that the custodian be permitted to vote both for and against the scheme in accordance with the instructions received from its clients and proxy forms should be prepared accordingly. In such cases the scheme documentation should include a form of voting instructions for use by custodians. 4.4 Custodians and clearing houses may be required to specify both the number of clients or members from whom they have received instructions in addition to the number of shares voted. The majority in number will be calculated on the basis of the number of clients or members giving instructions to the custodian or clearing house. The Court understands that both Euroclear and Clearstream Luxembourg are content to proceed in this way. In cases involving other custodians or clearing houses, the Court will require evidence that the custodian or clearing house is willing and able to give effect to the Court\u2019s directions. 5 Hearing the Petition 5.1 The substantive hearing of the petition will take place in open court. 5.2 The date for the substantive hearing of the petition will be fixed at or before the hearing of the interlocutory summons for a direction convening the Court meeting(s). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.3 Notice of the hearing date should be included in the scheme documentation, thus avoiding any subsequent need to publish advertisements. The explanatory memorandum or proxy statement should draw attention to the fact that shareholders or creditors will have the right to attend and be heard on the hearing of the petition. 5.4 GCR O.102, r.20 (10) provides that any person who voted at the Court meeting and any person who gave voting instructions to a custodian or clearing house who voted at the Court meeting, shall be entitled to be heard on the petition. In addition, the Court may be prepared to hear any other person whom it is satisfied has a substantial economic interest in the shares or debt instruments to which the scheme relates. 6 Miscellaneous 6.1  The Court is prepared in appropriate cases to direct that Court meetings be held outside the Cayman Islands. 6.2 Relevant extracts from the company\u2019s memorandum and articles of association should be exhibited to the supporting affidavit. It is not necessary to exhibit the whole of the memorandum and articles of association in every case. Dated this 17th day of September 2010 The Hon. Anthony Smellie QC, Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011 (GCR O. 1, r. 12) GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS (GCR O.62, r.16) 1.  This Practice Direction concerns taxation of costs on the standard basis in respect of work carried out by attorneys on or after 1 June 2011, and in respect of such work paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 shall no longer apply. In respect of taxation of costs on the standard basis in respect of work carried out by attorneys before 1 June 2011 paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 shall continue to apply. 2.  Save for the amendments effected by paragraph 1 of this Practice Direction, Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 shall continue to apply. 3.  The hourly rates to be applied will continue to be determined on the basis of the post-qualification experience of the person engaged as follows: Civil Division and Family Division More than 20 years Up to CI$443 or US$540 Between 15 and 20 years Up to CI$426 or US$520 Between 10 and 15 years Up to CI$361 or US$440 Between 5 and 10 years Up to CI$308 or US$375 Fewer than 5 years Up to CI$230 or US$280 Articled Clerks and Paralegals Up to CI$156 or US$190 Financial Services Division and Admiralty Division More than 20 years Up to CI$738 or US$900 Between 15 and 20 years Up to CI$705 or US$860 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Between 10 and 15 years Up to CI$599 or US$730 Between 5 and 10 years Up to CI$513 or US$625 Fewer than 5 years Up to CI$377 or US$460 Articled Clerks and Paralegals Up to CI$262 or US$320 In each case these are maximum rates. If in any proceedings, or part of proceedings, in the Civil Division or in the Family Division the Judge is satisfied that the proceedings, or that part of the proceedings, were unusually important or unusually complex, the Judge may certify that with respect to any one or more of the persons engaged the maximum allowable rates shall be those applicable in the Financial Services Division. In any proceedings in any Division the taxing officer may, in the exercise of the taxing officer\u2019s discretion, determine that rates lower than the maximum rates are appropriate in any particular case. The number of years post-qualification experience for attorneys shall be reckoned from the date upon which the attorney was first admitted to practice as an attorney in the Cayman Islands or as a professional legal adviser elsewhere, whichever is the earlier. King's Counsel shall be treated as attorneys having more than 20 years post-qualification experience. Issued by the Rules Committee on the 14 of April 2011 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice The Hon. Samuel Bulgin, Q.C., Attorney General Graham Ritchie, Q.C., Legal Practitioner Colin D. McKie, Legal Practitioner Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012 DELIVERY OF RESERVED JUDGMENTS It is now the established practice that reserved judgments arising from cases in the Financial Services, Civil and Family Divisions of the Grand Court will be delivered within two to three (2-3) months. In the Criminal Division of the Grand Court, the established practice is that reserved judgments are delivered as soon as practicably possible and in any event within one (1) month. Reserved judgments arising from criminal cases in the Summary Court are expected to be delivered within three (3) weeks and those arising from civil cases, within two to three (2-3) months. In the Court of Appeal, the established practice is that judgments not delivered by the end of the session in which they are reserved, will usually be delivered by the end of the next session. While it is the policy of the judiciary that these established practices shall be maintained, it must also be recognised that countervailing circumstances will sometimes arise. With the foregoing considerations in mind, the following practice directions are issued: (i)   A judge or magistrate should strive to deliver reserved judgments as soon as possible and in any event within such periods as are respectively mentioned above or as may from time to time be prescribed by the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of Appeal, as the case may be. If the judge or magistrate becomes aware that judicial commitments (or other circumstances) may prevent delivery of judgments within that time, the Chief Justice (or the President) should be alerted to that possibility. Arrangements will then be put in place to secure that the objectives of this Practice Direction are met. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (ii)  In keeping with these objectives, the Listing policy of the Grand and Summary Courts must also be adapted. To that end, it is also now directed that time for the preparation of judgments, commensurate with the complexity and length of time taken for a hearing or trial, shall be reserved immediately following the conclusion of the hearing or trial. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice The Cayman Islands 7th March 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012 PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\u2028IN WHICH THE JUDGE PRESIDES FROM OVERSEAS In keeping with the Grand Court (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2011 which confirm the jurisdiction of a judge who is physically outside the Islands to hold interlocutory hearings, the following shall apply: (i)   Following the directions of the Judge for the convening of the hearing, the applicant's attorney shall make arrangements with the Registrar of the Financial Services Division (or with the Clerk of Courts in respect of other Divisions) for the telecommunication link to be made (whether by telephone or televideo conference) (`the link'). (ii)  The link may be made by use of \\\"Skype\\\" or similar service or by Cable and Wireless \\\"Call Centre\\\" or televideo conference service, as the Judge may direct. The costs of the link, if any, will be assumed in the first instance by the applicant and payment made upon presentation with the monthly invoice by the Court Administration. (iii) All hearings will require attendance at Chambers by the applicant's attorney and (where appropriate or required, by the attorneys of other parties) and will be commenced by the engagement of the link to other participants as allowed by the Judge and to the Judge, at the time assigned. The Judge will then direct the conduct of the hearing. (iv)  Unless otherwise directed by the Judge, an accurate note of the hearing shall be kept by the applicant's attorney and presented to the Registrar for acceptance by the Judge as the record of the hearing. For these purposes, a printed record provided by the Cable and Wireless Call Centre Services may, if accepted by the Judge, suffice. Whenever the Court's digital recorders are used for recording the hearing, the applicant's attorney may rely on that recording but will nonetheless be responsible for having the recording transcribed and submitted to the Registrar. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (v)  A marshal of the Court (or other court officer) assigned by the Registrar with the agreement of the Judge, shall be present during the hearing to assist, if needs be, with the engagement of the link, with the recording of the proceedings and, as may be required, to assist the Judge. (vi) That officer will keep the log of the time of beginning and end of the link for the purposes of record keeping and invoicing. (vii) All orders declared by the Judge shall be formally extracted by the applicant's attorney and presented to the Registry (where appropriate, with the agreement of any other party) for acceptance and execution by the Judge. (viii)  Together with the note of the hearing (as approved by the Judge), the formal orders will be entered and kept on the respective Court file as part of the record of the action. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice March 9 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012 ATTIRE FOR PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT In keeping with and in confirmation of the practice that has developed with the agreement of the judges, the attire for proceedings in Chambers will be ordinary business attire. The attire for proceedings in Open Court will continue to be wig and gown, unless for some particular reason acceptable to the Judge, ordinary business attire is allowed. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice March 9 2012 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 LIMITED ADMISSION AS AN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW Section 4(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"the Law\\\") gives power to a Judge to admit a person as an Attorney-at-Law on a limited basis for the purpose of a specified suit or matter in regard to which that person has been instructed by a local Attorney-at-Law or when, in a Legal Aid case, the Clerk of Court has certified that there is no local representation available. The person proposed to be admitted must possess a qualification prescribed by Section 3(1) of the Law and to have come or intends to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter. The application is to be made in such manner as the Judge may think fit. There are concerns that such limited admission has become simply a formality and that the Judge concerned is not usually being provided with the information necessary to enable a proper exercise of discretion as the Law requires. In future, such applications must be made in the following manner: 1. The application and supporting affidavits must be filed and delivered to the Judge who is to hear the application not less than three (3) business days before the hearing of the application. If necessary, the affidavit of the person proposed to be admitted (\\\"the Applicant\\\") may, for the purposes of the hearing of the application, be in unsworn final draft form if the Applicant is not present in the Islands at the time, provided that an undertaking is given to the Court at the hearing of the application that the affidavit will be sworn as soon as possible after the Applicant's arrival in the Islands. 2. The application will not be listed to be heard less than one business day prior to the hearing of the specified suit or matter in which it is proposed that the Applicant should appear if that is the purpose for which the Applicant's admission is sought. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.  The application shall be supported by an affidavit sworn by the Applicant (\\\"the Applicant's Affidavit\\\") and also by an affidavit by the local Attorney-at-Law who, or a member of whose firm, has instructed the Applicant to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter (\\\"the Attorney's Affidavit\\\"). 4.  The Applicant's Affidavit shall contain and exhibit the following: (a)  details of the qualification(s) prescribed by Section 3(1) of the Law which the Applicant possesses and a certified copy or copies thereof shall be exhibited; (b)  confirmation that the Applicant is not or has not been the subject of any criminal conviction or proceedings other than in respect of a minor traffic offence; (c)  confirmation that the Applicant is not or has not been the subject of any disciplinary or other similar proceedings relating to professional misconduct of any kind and an appropriately certified Certificate of Good Standing or the equivalent issued by the professional body to which the Applicant belongs shall be exhibited; (d) confirmation that the Applicant has been instructed by a Cayman Islands Attorney-at-Law, who shall be identified, to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter, and that the Applicant has come or intends to come to the Islands for one or more of those purposes. 5. The original(s) of the certified copy or copies of the Applicant's qualifications(s) referred to in paragraph 4(a) above and of the certified Certificate of Good Standing or equivalent referred to in paragraph 4(c) above shall be made available to the Judge at the hearing of the application. 6. The Attorney's Affidavit shall contain and exhibit the following: (a)   confirmation that it is the wish of the relevant client of the deponent or that client\u2019s firm that the Applicant should be instructed on the GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 client's behalf to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter; (b)  confirmation that the Applicant has been instructed by the deponent, or by some other named Attorney-at-Law in the Applicant\u2019s firm, to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter; (c)  confirmation that the Applicant has been granted the necessary work permit or other immigration authorisation for the necessary duration to enable the Applicant to be in or come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter and a copy of the relevant work permit or other such authorisation shall be exhibited; (d)  unless the Judge hearing the Application is already very familiar with the specified suit or matter concerned, a sufficiently detailed summary thereof to enable the Judge to exercise that Judge\u2019s discretion in all the circumstances as to whether or not to admit the Applicant for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in that specified suit or matter; (e)  if the Applicant is not Leading Counsel or the equivalent but is junior counsel or a solicitor or the equivalent, sufficient explanation as to why it is necessary and appropriate for the Applicant to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter concerned. 7.  Subject to paragraph 8 below, the limited admission of junior counsel, solicitors or the equivalent will not normally be granted except in unusual and special circumstances which must be fully set out in the Attorney's Affidavit. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8.  The Judge may, in that Judge\u2019s discretion in the particular circumstances, themselves direct that a person qualified pursuant to Section 3(1) of the Law shall apply for limited admission for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in a specified suit or matter. In that case, with the exception of paragraphs 3, 4(a) \u2014 (c), 5, 6(c), 9 and 10, which shall remain applicable, the Judge may dispense with compliance with such other of the provisions, if any, of this Practice Direction as the Judge may think fit. 9. If granted limited admission the Applicant is required to sign the Register of Admitted Attorneys either at the time of the application or, if the application has been heard prior to the Applicant having come to the Islands, as soon as practicable after the Applicant\u2019s arrival in the Islands and in any event before any appearance in the specified suit or matter in which it is proposed the Applicant should appear. 10.  By signing the Register of Admitted Attorneys the Applicant is deemed to have accepted and agreed to act in accordance and to comply with all of the professional duties and obligations and to be subject to the professional discipline of a generally admitted Attorney-at-Law and an Officer of the Court. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice 9th February 2012 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 PRACTICE DIRECTION ON APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTIONS 72, 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d). In the recent past a number of decisions of this Court have dealt, in different ways, with the subject of applications under the RLL, for leave of the Court to enforce charges under the RLL by way of sale by private treaty. These Practice Directions seek to explain the practice of the Court which has emerged as the result of those decisions. Typically, Originating Summonses seek the following kinds of relief or variants thereof: 1.  Declaratory relief to the effect that the defendant chargor (\u201cthe chargor\u201d) is in default of payment under the charge; 2.  That the charge be enforced by sale of the charged property by way of public auction or private treaty, by the chargee acting in good faith and having regard to the interests of the chargor. 3.  That a reserved price be fixed for the sale by way of private treaty. 4.  That the property be listed for sale on the CIREBA Multi-listing System (\u201cthe MLS\u201d). 5.  That other terms and conditions of the sale be determined, if any. 6.  That leave be granted to issue a Writ of Possession with respect to the property. 7.  Alternatively, that the chargee be given reasonable access to the property for the purpose of viewing or for any other purpose in connection with the chargee\u2019s efforts to sell the charged property 8.  Costs. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Whether or not any aspect of relief is granted will of course be a matter for the exercise of discretion by the Court having regard to the particular circumstances of each case, including the conduct of the parties (see section 77 of the RLL and National Building Society v Cranston 2011 (1) CILR 67 and Bank of Butterfield (Cayman) Ltd v. Thornton and Thornton Cause No. 307 of 2010 written decision given on 29th March 2011) Where the chargee has a power of sale under the charge and has complied with the requirements of the RLL for the giving of notice, the jurisdiction of the Court to exercise its discretion to vary or add to the provisions of section 75 of the RLL to allow the chargee to sell by way of private treaty (in addition to or instead of by way of public auction) will not be in dispute. Section 77 provides that the parties to a charge may vary or add to the provisions of section 75: \u201cprovided that such variation or addition shall not be acted upon unless the court, having regard to the proceedings and conduct of the parties and the circumstances of the case, so orders\u201d. Factors of importance to the exercise of the Court\u2019s discretion will include: a.  That the property must not be sold at an undervalue (Paradise Manor Ltd v. Bank of Nova Scotia 1984-85 CILR 437; Bank of Butterfield (Cayman) Ltd. v Jervis and Jackson 2011 (1) CILR 54; b.  That the sale has to be in good faith (Paradise Manor Ltd v. Bank of Nova Scotia (above) and Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson (above); c.  The best evidence of market value is the reaction of the market (Scotiabank (Cayman Islands) Ltd. v. Rankine 2004-05 CILR Note 26 and Bank of Butterfield v. Thornton & Thornton (above)); d.  The standard of care required of the chargee: that of a reasonable person in respect of the conduct of that person\u2019s own private affairs (Paradise Manor Ltd v. Bank of Nova Scotia  (above)); GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 e.  Leave to sell by private treaty at a reserve price set by the Court will not usually be granted without previous attempts to market the property and to sell by public auction on the open market (Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson (above); f.  Before leave to sell by private treaty at a reserve price set by the Court will be given, there will usually be to the satisfaction of the Court, evidence at least of attempts to sell by way of public auction (now defined to include sale by listing on the MLS at a reserve price set by the chargee aimed at realising the true market value: see Scotiabank Trust v Ebanks and Gordon below. g.  However, leave to sell by private treaty may be granted where there has been no prior attempt to sell on the open market where the Court is satisfied that it is in the interest of justice so to order, especially bearing in mind that attempts to sell by way of a formal public auction could add unnecessarily to the costs to be ultimately passed on to the chargor (National Building Society of Cayman v. Cranston (above)). Where such leave is granted to sell by private treaty (that is: without a reserved price being set), the order will usually be conditioned as being subject to the chargee \u201cacting in good faith and having regard to the interests of the chargor\u201d. h.  \u201cSale by public auction\u201d does not necessarily require a formal auction with a bidding process conducted by an appointed auctioneer but \u201cin substance, the sale of a property through the MLS is a public auction\u201d (Scotiabank & Trust (Cayman) Ltd. v. Cecilia Ebanks (as administratrix of estate of Allan Ebanks) and Rudolph Gordon (as administrator of estate of Allan Ebanks) GC Cause No. 298 of 2010, Judgment delivered January 12th 2012 i.  The sanction of the Court of a price obtained whether by public auction (by listing on the MLS or otherwise) or by private treaty, is more likely to be granted where the original asking price had been set by the chargee by reference to an independent valuation. In this way the Court will be able more likely to conclude that the chargee has acted in good faith in exercise of its rights under the charge. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 j.  There is no need for an application to the Court for placement of the property for sale by public auction (whether by way of a listing on the MLS or by formal auction) in the first instance by the chargee who, by virtue of the powers given under the charge and section 75 of the RLL, can sell by way of public auction without the leave of the Court (Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson (above)). k.  An application to the Court is necessitated only where leave to sell by private treaty (whether by fixing of a reserve price or otherwise) is required by way of a variation of section 75 of the RLL as agreed in the charge loan agreement. l.  Where the Court considers that a chargee has brought an unnecessary application for leave to sell by public auction, the Court will refuse to grant an order for the costs of so doing Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson (above)). Other factors which the Court will consider will include: (i) the defendant(s)\u2019 position and whether they have notice of the application; (ii)  whether the defendants are represented and have a proper understanding of the application; (ii)  whether there is any element of unfairness or unreasonableness in the chargee\u2019s application; (iv) whether an order for costs should be imposed upon the chargor, over and above any right that the chargee might have to recover costs under the charge loan agreement. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice 22nd May 2012 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 (GCR O.1, r.12) LISTING OF FAMILY LAW PROCEEDINGS 1. Application and Commencement 1.1 This practice direction applies to \u201cfamily law proceedings\u201d defined as including any of the following \u2013 a.  applications under Section 20, Section 21 Matrimonial Causes Act (as amended and revised); b.  application is governed by rule 16 Matrimonial Causes Rules(as amended and revised); c.  applications under Section 6 of the Children Act (as amended and revised); d.  applications concerning affiliation orders; e. applications under the Protection from Domestic Violence Act (as amended and revised) f. applications under the Children Act  (as amended and revised) 1.2 This Practice Direction shall come into force on, 8th October, 2012. 2. Introduction 2.1 Applications brought for orders within family law proceedings should come before the Court in a timely manner. The purpose of this practice direction is to ensure that all applications made within family law proceedings will be allocated a first mention date within 28 days of filing. Emergency applications may nonetheless be brought before a judge on a more urgent basis. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.2 The Listing Office will allocate at least two days each month as family law proceedings mention days. The maximum hearing time that may be given for any case listed on a mention day will be 30 minutes. New applications will be allocated a first appointment hearing for a specific time. The applicant must ensure that the application and affidavit are in the appropriate form and that there is prompt service of the same. The parties must be punctual in their attendance for all appointments and a party shall attend all appointments of which that party has been given notice, unless the Court otherwise directs. 3. New Practice 3.1  The applicant shall file the application in the appropriate form along with supporting affidavit(s). There should be sufficient copies for them to be served on each respondent. 3.2 The applicant shall serve a copy of the application (endorsed with the date, time and place of the hearing) and supporting affidavit(s) on each respondent, such minimum number of days prior to the date fixed as may be specified in Rules of Court. 3.3  On receipt of the documents filed the Listing Office in conjunction with the Court Registry shall: (i) fix the date, time and place for a first appointment, allowing sufficient time for the applicant to comply with paragraph 3.2. The allocated first appointment should be within 28 days of the date of the issuing of the application; (ii) endorse the date, time and place so fixed upon the copies of the application filed by the applicant; and (iii)      return the copies to the applicant forthwith GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.4  An application for an urgent or ex parte hearing may, with leave of the Court, be made in which case the applicant shall, upon making the application, file with the Court Registry the application in the appropriate form along with supporting affidavit (which should set out the reasons why an urgent or ex parte hearing is necessary). 3.5 Where the Court refuses to make an order on an ex parte application, it may direct that the application be made inter partes. DATED this 8th day of July 2012 The Hon Anthony Smellie QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012 (GCR O.1, r. 12) PAYMENT SCHEDULES - AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES (GCR O.92, r. 9) 1. This practice direction shall come into force on 1 December 2012. With effect from 1 December 2012 practice Direction No. 4 of 1995 is hereby revoked. 2. The following officers are authorised to sign Payment Schedules: 'A' Signatories - The Chief Justice Puisne Judges (including acting Judges) Magistrates (including acting Magistrates) Court Administrator 'B' Signatories The Clerk of the Court The Registrar of the Court of Appeal Deputy Clerks of the Court 3. Payment Schedule requiring payment of- (a)  less than CI$ 10,000, US$12,000 or the equivalent in any other currency shall be signed by any 'A' or 'B' signatory; (b)  more than CI$ 10,000, US$ 12,000 or the equivalent in any other currency but less than CI$ 100,000, US$120,000 or the equivalent Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 in any other currency, shall be signed by an 'A' signatory or any two 'B' signatories; and (c)  more than CI$ 100,000, US$ 120,000 or the equivalent in any other currency, shall be signed by an 'A' signatory Dated this 19th day of October 2012 Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 (GCR O.1, r.12) CONSENT ORDERS IN ANCILLARY RELIEF PROCEEDINGS Practitioners are reminded that when the Court is asked to make an order by consent, embodying the terms of an agreed settlement of ancillary relief proceedings, the Court is still obliged to comply with the statutory duty imposed by Section 19 of the Matrimonial Causes Act (as amended and revised). 1. In this regard, the Court will now require the following before exercising its powers under section 19: (i) Confirmation signed by both parties that they have made and received sufficient disclosure to enable them to make an informed decision to ask the Court to approve the terms contained within the proposed consent order. (ii) In the case of unrepresented parties, signed confirmation that they have been advised to seek legal advice in regard to the proposed settlement, and have either done so or have declined to do so. (iii) The lodging of a fully completed Statement of information for a consent order. (Where all of the parties attend the hearing of an application for financial relief or where the court is satisfied by the content of evidence already filed, the court may dispense with the lodging of a Statement of information and give directions for the information which would otherwise be required to be given in such a statement to be given in such manner as it sees fit). This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 1st day of May 2013. DATED this 9th day of April 2013 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 (GCRO.1, R.12) FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS 1. Appointment of Registrar of the FSD 1.1 Ms. Tomica Daley has been appointed Registrar of the FSD, pursuant to Rule 2(1) of the Grand Court (Amendment) Rules 2009 with effect from 6th May 2013. 1.2 All communications with the Registrar should be \u2014 (a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor (Room#l0l), Kirk House; or (b) by e-mail addressed to Tomica.Daley@judicial.ky; or (c) by telephone 244 3808 2. Assignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD 2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting in conjunction with the Chief Justice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined in OCR 0.72, r.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the proceeding is commenced. 2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner\/plaintiff\u2019s attorney to provide the Registrar with any and all information which appears to that attorney to be relevant in determining which judge should be assigned to the matter. For example \u2014 (a) If the plaintiff\u2019s attorney considers that it would be appropriate for two or more related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process; or (b) If the plaintiffs attorney considers that it would be inappropriate for a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever reason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process. 2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will \u2014 (a) notify the parties' attorneys; and (b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge. 2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned judge on the next business following the day on which the originating process is filed at the FSD Registry. 2.5 The docket of the financial services proceedings assigned to each Judge of the FSD will be updated by the judge's secretary and circulated weekly to the Chief Justice, the Registrar and the Listing Officer. 2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.5, r. 1(7) requires that the initials of the assigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part of the cause number. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must be included as part of the cause number as it appears in all pleadings, affidavits and orders. 3. Procedure for listing hearings 3.1 Ms. Yasmin Ebanks will continue to serve as Listing Officer of the FSD but effective immediately she will make Listings in consultation with the Registrar of theFSD. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.2 All communications with the FSD Registry should be \u2014 (a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor (Room#l05), Kirk House; or (b) by e-mail addressed to Tomica.Daley@judicial.ky (c) listing for FSD cases will be primarily managed by the FSD Registrar in liaison with the Listing Officer. All requests for FSD listings must be made by email addressed to Tomica.Daley@judicial.ky 3.3 For the purpose of this Practice Direction the expression \\\"hearing\\\" shall include summonses for directions, case management conferences (\\\"CMCs\\\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference calls), interlocutory applications and trials. 3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has been assigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to review the Court file. 3.5 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to FSD. 3.6 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the availability of judges, the Registrar of the FSD and Listing Officer are not authorised to fix any hearing date without the prior approval of the assigned judge. If the assigned judge is not already familiar with the issues or cannot readily ascertain the issues relevant to the proposed hearing by reviewing the Court file, the parties may be required to produce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72, r.4(3). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.7 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned judge in consultation with the Registrar and Listing Officer, will normally fix the hearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions or at a CMC in which all parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel) will be required to participate. 3.8 The Registrar will publish a monthly list (on the 1st of each month) of hearings scheduled in the FSD for the ensuing month. 4. Listing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions 4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for reducing the share capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies Act) the petitioner's attorney is required (pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6) to issue a summons for directions at the same time as presenting the petition. 4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the proposed order for directions including the timetable for the company meeting(s) and court hearing(s), together with a covering letter which explains whether and, if so, why the matter is particularly time sensitive. 4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the assigned Judge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be dispensed with under s.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional case where settlement of a list of creditors is required under s.15(2), and the materials filed do not disclose any other reason for the assigned judge to require additional evidence or submissions, then the Judge may make an order for directions without the need for a hearing. In all other cases the Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing in chambers. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. Listing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders under s.124 5.1  Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of the Companies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made without the need for  any  hearing  (pursuant to CWR O.15, r.5(1).) 5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which further evidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may convene a CMC or direct the Listing Officer to fix a date for hearing the petition in open court. 6. Applications for an order that a company be restored to the Register 6.1 With effect from Monday 27th September 2010 applications made  by a company  or one of its members, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.17, will be determined by the Registrar of the FSD rather than the Clerk of the Court  and Form Nos. 66 and 67 should  be amended accordingly. 6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17 (6) (c), that an application ought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the Registrar will \u2014 (a) assign the application to a judge of the FSD; (b) fix a hearing date; and (c) give notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail. 6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.18, will continue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.4 At the same time as assigning a creditor's application to a judge of the FSD, the Registrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to advertise the petition and give other creditors an opportunity to be heard, the hearing will be fixed on a date not less than 21 days or more than 28 days after the date on which the petition is presented. 7. Applications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred 7.1 An application by an official liquidator or officeholder for a direction, pursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), that payment of court fees be deferred must be made to the assigned judge. 7.2 Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the assigned judge (with a copy to the Registrar) and signed by the officeholder personally. 7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned Judge and that Judge\u2019s decision will be communicated to the applicant and the Registrar by the judge's secretary. 7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the officeholder shall have the right to ask the Judge to reconsider that Judge\u2019s decision, for which purpose the applicant may ask the judge's secretary to fix an appointment for the applicant to appear before the Judge in person. 7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) is to ensure that an officeholder who is required or entitled to make an application to the Court in the performance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will be payable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not be deterred from performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in the position of having to pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s own pocket. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an official liquidator has under that official liquidator\u2019s control \\\"sufficient money with which to pay the fees immediately\\\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge will have regard to the general rules as to priority contained in CWR Order 20, the effect of which is that court fees rank ahead of an official liquidator's remuneration. 7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under that officeholder\u2019s control, that officeholder\u2019s application letter must state (a) the amount which is immediately available; (b) the amount which is likely to become available to that officeholder within the next 90 days; (c) the purposes for which the officeholder intends to spend such cash over the next 90 days; and (d) whether the officeholder has received any remuneration or holds funds in trust for that purpose. 8. Applications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as \\\"consolidated\\\" for the purposes of assessing court fees 8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff for a direction that two or more separate proceedings governed by the Companies Winding Up Rules or GCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of calculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable pursuant to Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) must be made to the Registrar. 8.2  Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the Registrar at the time of filing the originating process. 8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the provisions of paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shall apply. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 9. Case Management Conferences 9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of 0.72, r.4 (2), the assigned Judge may convene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit. 9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if foreign lawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the parties or the assigned judge is likely to be off the Island. 9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a telephone conference call, the Registrar will direct one of the parties to set up the call and circulate the dial-in instructions and codes to the judge and all the parties. 9.4 The etiquette for telephonic CMCs requires that all participating attorneys must be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge will be the last person to join the conference, whereupon the Judge will ask all the participants to identify themselves. 9.5 Telephonic CMC's may not be tape recorded without the consent of the Judge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be tape recorded, the Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the judge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not tape recorded, the note taken or approved by the judge will constitute the official record. 9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the assigned judge during the course of a CMC and, in appropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the principal purpose of fixing the date for the trial or further hearings. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD 10.1 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear summonses for directions and interlocutory applications by means of telephone or video conferences when they are off the Island. 10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes place by telephone or video conference. 11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 27th day of September 2013. With effect from 27th September 2013 Practice Direction No. 1 of 2010 is hereby revoked. September 26, 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013 (Orders 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 19 and 25 Companies Winding Up Rules (as amended and revised) PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OF WINDING UP PETITIONS With effect from Friday 1st March 2013, the Companies Winding Up (Amendment) Rules 2013 amended Orders 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 19 and 25 of the Companies Winding Up Rules 2008 and varied the procedure for filing of Creditors\u2019 Petitions, Contributory Petitions and Authority's Petitions. In order to ensure that winding up petitions and summonses for directions relating to winding up petitions are served with hearing dates on the same day that they are filed, the following procedure now governs the administrative process \u2014 1. Winding up petitions must not be filed until after the case has been assigned to a Judge and a hearing date has been fixed. 2. Attorneys are required to deliver the winding up petition (and supporting affidavits) to the Registrar of the Financial Services Division together with a covering letter asking for the case to be assigned to a Judge and for a hearing date to be fixed. Any winding up petitions presented to the Civil Registry must be delivered to the Registrar of the Financial Services Division without being stamped and filed. 3. The Chief Justice will assign the matter to a Judge and return the file to the Registrar of the Financial Services Division. 4. A hearing date would normally be assigned within 24 hours after the Chief Justice assigns the matter to a Judge. 5. As soon as the hearing date has been fixed:- GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (a) the assigned Judge's secretary should notify the Petitioner's attorneys of the hearing date, and request payment of fees; (b) The assigned Judge's secretary should stamp and file the petition and return it to the Petitioner's attorney; (c) the assigned Judge's secretary should notify the Petitioner's attorneys that the filed documents are ready for collection and payment of fees; (d) the fees should then be paid; and (e) the petition and supporting affidavits must be served forthwith. Because the FSD cause number is generated by the Cash Office upon payment of the filing fee, it follows that cheques should not be accepted in respect of winding up petitions until after all the steps outlined above have been completed. 6. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 27th September 2013. September 26, 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 (GCR O. 1, r. 12) JUDICIAL REVIEW \u2014 PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW (GCR O. 53) Introduction This protocol applies to all proceedings for judicial review in the Cayman Islands.  It does not affect the time limit specified by GCR O. 53, r. 4 which requires that any application for judicial review must be filed promptly and in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose.2 Judicial review allows people with a sufficient interest in a decision or action by a public body to ask a judge to review the lawfulness of: 1.1 rules, and regulations, or other subordinate legislation; or 1.2 a decision, action or failure to act in relation to the exercise of a public function. Judicial review may be used where there is no right of appeal or where all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. Alternative Dispute Resolution (\\\"ADR\\\") 2 Save where any statutory provision has the effect of limiting the time within which an application for judicial review may be made; see GC R 0. 53, r. 4(3). Although the Court does have the discretion under GCR O.  53, r. 4 to allow  a  late application, the Court will only permit this in exceptional circumstances.  Compliance  with this  Protocol  alone  is  unlikely  to  be  sufficient  to persuade the Court to allow a late application. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.1 The parties should consider whether some form of alternative dispute resolution procedure would be more suitable than litigation, and if so, endeavour to agree which form to adopt. Both the applicant and defendant may be required by the Court to provide evidence that alternative means of resolving their dispute were considered. The Court takes the view that litigation should be a last resort, and that proceedings should not be issued prematurely when a settlement is still actively being explored. Parties are warned that if the protocol is not followed (including this paragraph) then the Court may have regard to such conduct when determining costs. However, parties should also note that an application for judicial review \\\"shall be made promptly and in any event within 3 months from the date when grounds for the application first arose\\\". 3.2 It is not practicable in this protocol to address in detail how the parties might decide which method to adopt to resolve their particular dispute. However, summarised below are some of the options for resolving disputes without recourse to litigation: (a) discussion and negotiation; (b) early neutral evaluation by an independent third party (for example, an attorney experienced in the field of administrative law or an individual experienced in the subject matter of the claim); (c) mediation - a form of facilitated negotiation assisted by an independent neutral party. 3.3 It is expressly recognised that no party can or should be forced to mediate or enter into any form of ADR. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Judicial review may not be appropriate in every instance. Applicants are strongly advised to seek appropriate legal advice when considering such proceedings and, in particular, before adopting this Protocol or issuing an application. This Protocol sets out a code of good practice and contains the steps which parties should generally follow before making an application for judicial review. This Protocol does not impose a greater obligation on a public body to disclose documents or give reasons for its decision than that already provided for in statute or common law. However, where the Court considers that a public body should have provided relevant documents and\/or information, particularly where this failure is a breach of a statutory or common law requirement, it may impose sanctions. This Protocol will not be appropriate where the defendant does not have the legal power to change the decision being challenged. This Protocol will not be appropriate in urgent cases; for example, when directions have been set, or are in force, for the applicant's rem oval from the Cayman Islands, or where there is an urgent need for an interim order to compel a public body to act where it has unlawfully refused to do so; in such cases an application for judicial review should be made immediately. An applicant's letter before action will not stop the implementation of a disputed decision in all instances. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 All applicants will need to satisfy themselves whether they should follow this Protocol, depending upon the circumstances of that applicant\u2019s case. Where the use of this Protocol is appropriate, the Court will normally expect all parties to have complied with it and will take into account compliance or non-compliance with the Protocol when giving direct ions for case management of proceedings or when making orders for costs. However, even in emergency cases, it is good practice to send a fax to the defendant a draft of the application for judicial review which the applicant intends to issue. An applicant is also normally required to notify a defendant when an interim mandatory order is being sought. The applicant's letter before action Before making a claim, the applicant should send a letter to the defendant. The purpose of this letter is to identify the issues in dispute and to establish whether litigation can be avoided. Applicants should normally use the suggested standard format for the letter outlined at Annex A. 10 The letter should contain the date and details of the decision, act or omission being challenged and a clear summary of the facts on which the application is based. It should also contain the details of any relevant information that the applicant is seeking and an explanation of why this is considered relevant. 11 The letter should normally contain the details of any interested parties known to the applicant. Those interested parties should be sent a copy of the letter before action for their information. Applicants are strongly advised to seek appropriate legal advice when considering such proceedings and, in particular, before sending the letter before action to other interested parties or issuing an application. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 12 An application should not normally be issued until the proposed date for reply given in the letter before action has expired, unless the circumstances of the case require more immediate action to be taken. The defendant's letter of response 13 Defendants should normally respond within 14 days of the letter before action using the standard format at Annex B. Failure to do so will be taken into account by the Court and sanctions may be imposed on the defendant unless there are good reasons not to do so. 14 Where it is not possible within the proposed time limit to reply substantively to the letter before action the defendant should send an interim reply and propose a reasonable extension within which to reply substantively to the letter before action.  Where a defendant seeks an extension, it should give reasons and, where required, the additional information requested by the applicant in the letter before action. Proposing such an extension will not affect the time limit for the applicant to issue an application for judicial review nor will it bind the applicant where (s)he considers the proposal to be unreasonable. However, where the Court considers that a subsequent application for judicial review has been made prematurely it may impose sanctions. 15 If the defendant concedes the claim in full, its reply should say so in clear and unambiguous terms. 16 If the defendant concedes the claim in part or does not concede the claim at all, its reply should say so in clear and unambiguous terms, and: 16.1 where appropriate, contain a new decision, clearly identifying what aspects of the claim are being conceded and what are not, or, GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 give a clear timescale within which the new decision will be issued; 16.2 provide a fuller explanation for the decision, if it considers it appropriate to do so; 16.3 address any points of dispute, or explain why they cannot be addressed; 16.4 enclose any relevant documentation requested by the applicant, or explain why the documents are not being enclosed; and 16.5 where appropriate, confirm whether or not it will oppose any application for an interim remedy. 17 The response should be sent to all interested parties identified by the applicant and contain details of any other parties whom the defendant considers also have an interest. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 ANNEX A LETTER BEFORE ACTION SECTION 1 - INFORMATION REQUIRED IN A LETTER BEFORE ACTION Proposed claim for judicial review 1. To (Insert the name and address (including post-office box number) of the proposed defendant - see details in section 2.) 2. The applicant (Insert the title, first and last name and the address (including postoffice box number) of you, the applicant.) 3. Reference details (When dealing with large organisations it is important to understand that the information relating to any particular individual's previous dealings with it may not be immediately available. Therefore it is important to set out any relevant reference numbers for the matter in dispute and\/or the identity of those within the public body who have been handling the particular matter in dispute.) 4. The details of the matter being challenged (Set out clearly the matter being challenged, particularly if there has been more than one decision.) 5. The issue GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (Set out the date and details of the decision, or act or omission being challenged, a brief summary of the facts and why it is contended to be wrong. Consider attaching a draft of the Originating Summons.) 6. The details of the action that the defendant is expected to take (Set out the details of the remedy you seek, including whether you are requesting a review or any interim remedy.) 7. The details of your attorneys, if any, dealing with this application (Set out the name, address (including post-office box number), fax number and, if known, email address, and reference details of any attorneys dealing with the application on your behalf.) 8. The details of any interested parties (Set out the details of any interested parties and confirm that they have been sent a copy of this letter.) 9. The details of any information sought (Set out the details of any information that you seek. This may include a request for a fuller explanation of the reasons for the decision that is being challenged.) l 0. The details of any documents that are considered relevant and necessary (Set out the details of any documentation or policy in respect of which you seek disclosure and explain why these are relevant. If you rely on a statutory duty to disclose, you should specify that duty.) 11. The address for reply and service of court documents Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (Insert the address (including post-office box number) to which the defendant should reply, including, where relevant, a fax number and\/or email address.) 12. Proposed reply date (The precise time will depend upon the circumstances of each individual case. Although a shorter or longer time may be appropriate in a particular case, in most circumstances it is reasonable to allow 14 days.) SECTION 2 - ADDRESS FOR SENDING THE LETTER BEFORE ACTION Letters before action sent to statutory authorities should be addressed to the relevant Chief Executive Officer, Managing Director, or Director as the case may be. Letters before action to statutory tribunals should be addressed to the Chairperson of the Tribunal. All letters before action should be copied to the Hon. Attorney General, Government Administration Building, 133 Elgin Avenue, George Town, P.O. Box 907, Grand Cayman KYl-1103, Cayman Islands. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 ANNEX B RESPONSE TO A LETTER BEFORE ACTION INFORMATION REQUIRED IN A RESPONSE TO A LETTER BEFORE ACTION Proposed claim for Judicial Review 1. Applicant (Insert the title, first and last names and the address (including postoffice box number) to which any reply should be sent. If responding to an attorney, the letter should also be sent by fax and\/or email if the attorney's details are available.) 2. From (Insert the name and address of the defendant.) 3. Reference details (Set out the relevant reference numbers for the matter in dispute and the identity of those within the public body who have been handling the issue.) 4. The details of the matter being challenged (Set out details of the matter being challenged, providing a fuller explanation of the decision, where this is considered appropriate.) 5. Response to the proposed application Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (Set out whether the defendant concedes the issue in question in part, or in full, or will contest it. Where the defendant does not propose to disclose any information that the applicant has requested, the defendant should explain the reason for this. Where the defendant is sending an interim reply and there is a realistic prospect of settlement, it should include details.) 6. Details of any other interested parties (Identify any other parties whom the defendant considers to have an interest in the issue to the extent that the applicant has not already confirmed that (s)he has sent to them a copy of the letter before action, and confirm that they have been sent a copy of this response letter and of the letter before action.) 7. Address for further correspondence and service of court documents (Set out the address (including post-office box number and fax number and\/or email address) for any future correspondence on this matter, and an address (including post-office box number for service of any court documents.) December 12, 2013 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 PRACTICE GUIDANCE Use of portable cameras, recording and electronic devices, including cellular phones and laptop computers, in and from court buildings, courtrooms and judges\u2019 chambers The prevalent use of recorders, cellular phones, laptops and other devices, whether electronic or otherwise, and live text-based forms of communication (including texts and \u201cTwitter\u201d) in court buildings and in particular in and from courtrooms and chambers has made it necessary to provide directions on their usage by attorneys and counsel and their assistants and employees attending court or chambers. Separate guidance is issued for the press and the general public (see paras 1 to 16 in Practice Guidance below). 1. The following definitions shall apply: (a)  \u201ccourt\u201d means any courtroom or equivalent, including judge\u2019s chambers, or any other place in which judicial business is being carried out whatever type of matter is being or will be heard therein; (b)  \u201ccourt building\u201d means any building in which a court is located, whether permanently or temporarily; (c)  \u201celectronic device\u201d means, for these purposes: (i)  any type of portable phone or computer or any other device that is capable of receiving, transmitting, making, saving or recording messages or transcripts, whether verbal or written, images, sounds, data or other information by electronic or any other means; (ii)  any camera, whether a separate instrument or integrated within some other device and regardless of whether it operates electronically, mechanically or otherwise and whether it Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 records still or moving images by using digital technology, film, or any other means; (iii) any recording device regardless of whether it operates electronically, mechanically or otherwise and whether it uses digital technology, tape or any other means. (d)  \u201cJudge\u201d includes, for this purpose, a Magistrate and a Justice of the Peace. 2.  Possession and use of electronic devices: (a)  Generally: Subject to inspection by court security personnel and the restrictions in this Practice Direction, an electronic device, other than a separate camera, may be brought into a court building and used other than in a court in session for the purpose of making and receiving phone calls and electronic messages by e-mail, text, Twitter or otherwise for any lawful purpose not otherwise prohibited provided that no electronic device may be used to take photographs or in any manner whatsoever that interferes with proceedings in any court or with the work of any court or Judicial Administration staff or other official personnel in any way. Without prejudice to this generality, verbal use of any electronic device may not take place near the workstation or place of work of any member of such staff or personnel or near the door to any court in session. (b)  Court (i)  All electronic devices shall be turned off before entering a court in session and, subject to (ii) below, shall remain turned off while inside the court and no electronic device shall be used while in the court. (ii)  A presiding Judge will, in that Judge\u2019s discretion in the particular circumstances, usually allow the attorneys and counsel appearing in the hearing in the court (and their assistants and employees) to make reasonable and lawful use of electronic devices in the court in connection with the hearing concerned, provided that such use is not verbal, that GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the electronic device is in \u201csilent\u201d mode or similar mode and that such use does not interfere in any way with the proceedings or inconvenience the Judge or anyone else present. (iii) Under the direction of the Judge, electronic communication linking an on-site electronic device to an off-premises receiving device or network may be specifically permitted for the purpose of assisting the Court in its duties consistent with the provisions of the Practice Direction and Guidance. (c)  Security or privacy in a particular case: If, in the discretion of the presiding Judge the circumstances of a particular case or hearing raise security or privacy issues that the Judge considers justify a restriction on the use of electronic devices or any of them, the Judge may make a direction or order limiting or prohibiting such use in the court or in any other area of the court building designated by the Judge for the purpose. Such direction or order may provide for the collection by a marshal or court security official of all electronic devices in the possession of those present in the court or other designated area of the court building and their return when the persons who were in possession of such electronic devices leave the court or other designated area. (d)  Breach of Practice Direction (i)  A marshal or court security official, whether on the order or direction of a Judge or otherwise, may confiscate and retain any electronic device that is used in breach of this Practice Direction or of any order or direction of a Judge. Confiscation or retention shall operate subject to the direction or order of the court. (ii)  A Judge may direct the person in possession of any electronic device to delete any images or recordings made which are prohibited under this Practice Direction. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (iii)  A marshal or court security official, on the order or direction of a Judge, may delete any images or recordings made which are prohibited under this Practice Direction (iv)  A person who willfully or persistently breaches this Practice Direction or any direction or order by a Judge in relation to any electronic device may be found in contempt of Court. Dated the 6th day of January 2014 Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C. Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 PRACTICE GUIDANCE 1.  This Practice Guidance (the Guidance) applies to court proceedings which are open to the public and to those parts of the proceedings which are not subject to reporting restrictions. It is issued (as guidance and not a Practice Direction) following a consultation relating to the use of live, text-based communications. Those consulted included the judiciary, the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Bar, the Law Society, and Editors in addition to interested members of the public via the Judicial website. 2.  The Guidance clarifies the use which may be made of live text-based communications, such as mobile email, social media (including Twitter) and internet enabled laptops in and from courts in the Cayman Islands. For the purposes of this Guidance these means of communication are referred to, compendiously, as live, text-based communications. 3. The Guidance is consistent with the general practice of the Courts to prohibit the taking of photographs in court and the use of sound recording equipment in court unless the leave of the judge has first been obtained. In addition, there is the general requirement that nothing should be published which is likely to prejudice a fair trial. General principles 4.  The Judge or Magistrate has an overriding responsibility to ensure that proceedings are conducted consistently with the proper administration of justice, and to avoid any improper interference with its processes. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.  A fundamental aspect of the proper administration of justice is the principle of open justice. Fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings forms part of that principle. The principle is however subject to well-known exceptions. Two such exceptions are the prohibitions, set out in paragraph 3, on photography in court and on making sound recordings of court proceedings. 6.  The prohibition on photography in court, by any means, is absolute in the context of court hearings and in relation to those within the precincts of the court. Any equipment which has photographic capability must not have that function activated. 7. Sound recordings are also prohibited unless, in the exercise of its discretion, the court permits such equipment to be used. Some of the factors relevant to the exercise of that discretion are: (a)  the existence of any reasonable need on the part of the applicant for leave, whether a litigant or a person connected with the press or broadcasting, for the recording to be made; (b)  the risk that the recording could be used for the purpose of briefing witnesses out of court; (c)  any possibility that the use of the recorder would disturb the proceedings or distract or worry any witnesses or other participants. Use of live, text-based communications: general considerations 8.  The normal, indeed almost invariable, rule has been that cellular phones must be turned off in court. There is however no statutory prohibition on the use of live, text-based communications in open court. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 9.  Where a member of the public, who is in court, wishes to use live textbased communications during court proceedings an application for permission to activate and use, in silent mode, a cellular phone, small laptop or similar piece of equipment, solely in order to make live, textbased communications of the proceedings, will need to be made. The application may be made by sending a written request to the judge through court staff. 10.  It is presumed that a representative of the media or a legal commentator using live, text-based communications from court does not pose a danger of interference to the proper administration of justice in the individual case. This is because the most obvious purpose of permitting the use of live, text-based communications would be to enable the media to produce fair and accurate reports of the proceedings. As such, a representative of the media or a legal commentator who wishes to use live, text-based communications from court may do so without making an application to the court. To ensure the proper application of this direction, it will be necessary to maintain a register of accredited media representatives similar to that maintained by the Cayman Islands Parliament. 11.  When considering, either generally or on its own motion, or following an application by a member of the public, whether to permit live, textbased communications, and if so by whom, the paramount question for the Judge will be whether the application may interfere with the proper administration of justice. 12. In considering the question of permission, the factors identified in relation to sound recordings above are likely to be relevant (paragraph 7 above). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 13.  Without being exhaustive, the danger to the administration of justice is likely to be at its most acute in the context of criminal trials, e.g. where witnesses who are out of court may be informed of what has already happened in court and so coached or briefed before they then give evidence, or where information posted on, for instance, Twitter about inadmissible evidence may influence members of a jury. However, the danger is not confined to criminal proceedings; in civil, and sometimes family proceedings, simultaneous reporting from the courtroom may create pressure on witnesses, distracting or worrying them. 14.  It may be necessary for the Judge or Magistrate to limit live, text-based communications to representatives of the media for journalistic purposes but to disallow its use by the wider public in court. That may arise if it is necessary, for example, to limit the number of mobile electronic devices in use at any given time because of the potential for electronic interference with the court\u2019s own sound recording equipment, or because the widespread use of such devices in court may cause a distraction in the proceedings. 15. Subject to these considerations, the use of an unobtrusive, hand-held, silent piece of modern equipment for the purposes of simultaneous reporting of proceedings to the outside world as they unfold in court by accredited media representatives is generally unlikely to interfere with the proper administration of justice. 16. Permission to use live, text-based communications from court may be withdrawn by the court at any time if the presiding judge considers that the circumstances so require. Dated the 6th day of January 2014 GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014 REQUIREMENT FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS MADE IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT 1. Orders made by the Family Division of the Grand Court are not preferences, requests or mere indications; they are orders. Practitioners and those who appear before the Grand Court are reminded that orders, including interlocutory orders, must be complied with to the letter and on time. 2. In Re W (A Child); Re H (Children) [2013] EWCA Civ 1177 at paras. 52 & 53, Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division in England and Wales, stated: 'The court is entitled to expect - and from now on family courts will demand - strict compliance with all such orders. Non-compliance with orders should be expected to have and will usually have a consequence. Let me spell it out. An order that something is to be done by 4pm on Friday, is an order to do that thing by 4pm on Friday, not by 4.21 pm on Friday let alone by 3.01pm the following Monday or some time later the following week. A person who finds himself unable to comply timeously with his obligations under an order should apply for an extension of time before the time for compliance has expired. It is simply not acceptable to put forward as an explanation for noncompliance with an order the burden of other work. If the time allowed for compliance with an order turns out to be inadequate the remedy is either to apply to the court for an  extension of time or to pass the task to someone else who has available the time in which to do it.\\\"3 3 Underlining made for the purposes of the Practice Circular Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3. Sir James Munby reiterated these views at page 6 of the 7th View from the President's Chambers, January 2014: deeply rooted culture in the family courts which, however long established, will no longer be tolerated. I refer to the slapdash, lackadaisical and on occasions almost contumelious attitude which still far too frequently characterises the response to orders made by family courts. There is simply no excuse for this. Orders, including interlocutory orders, must be obeyed and complied with to the letter and on time. Too often they are not. They are not preferences, requests or mere indications; they are orders. This principle applies as much to orders by way of interlocutory case management directions as to any other species of order. The court is entitled to expect - and from now on family courts will demand - strict compliance with all such orders. Both parties and nonparties to whom orders are addressed must take heed. Noncompliance with an order by anyone is bad enough. It is a particularly serious matter if the defaulter is a public body. Noncompliance with orders should be expected to have and will usually have a consequence: see Re W (A Child), Re H (Children) [2013] EWCA Civ 1177.\\\" 4. Regrettably the concerns expressed by the President of the Family Division in England and Wales are equally applicable to the response to orders from a number of attorneys and parties involved in proceedings before the Family Division of the Grand Court. 5. This Circular reaffirms the intention of the Judges that due regard be paid to the guidance given in the case law as summarised above by Sir James Munby. GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6. Accordingly, persons who appear before the Grand Court are expected to comply with their plain and unqualified obligation to comply with the terms of a Court order made against or in respect of them, unless or until it is discharged. This obligation applies to all forms of orders including interlocutory case management directions. 7. If parties are unable to comply with the terms of an order, they are not entitled to agree a variation of the order without obtaining the Court's approval, and therefore must make the appropriate application to the Grand Court before the time for compliance has expired. Issued by the Chief Justice following discussion with the Judges of the Family Division. 29 January 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014 COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNSEL AND THE COURT ETC. Communications with the trial Judge 1.  There have been recent instances of counsel attempting to communicate directly with the Judge, particularly by e-mail. This is not permissible, may compromise the integrity of the proceedings concerned and should cease. 2.  The general rule is that all out of court communications between counsel and the Court, whether written or oral, should take place with or through the Registrar, Listing Officer or Clerk of Court. 3.  It has also become common place to find correspondence between the attorneys included in the court bundles. Normal party and party correspondence should not be included in bundles submitted to the court. There are occasional exceptions, such as where properly exhibited in an affidavit as evidence on a matter in issue, where necessary to support an application for a wasted costs order or where inclusion is expressly directed by the court. Correspondence with the Registry 4.  Normal party and party correspondence should not be copied to the Registry. The only correspondence which should be directed to the Registry is that which covers a filing, seeks a date or seeks some other form of action from the Registry. 5.  Save as regards applications which are properly made on an ex parte basis without notice to any other party, no party should communicate with the Court without notice to all parties affected. In particular, save in such circumstances, all correspondence with the Court should be copied to the other parties. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Ex parte Applications 6.  Counsel should note that an ex parte application is not the normal or ordinary means of applying for an injunction and the jurisdiction of the court to entertain an ex parte application for an injunction is predicated upon urgency. Thus GCR. 29 r. 1(2) provides: \u201c(2) Where the case is one of urgency such application may be made ex parte on affidavit but, except as aforesaid, such applications must be made by motion or summons.\u201d 7.  Counsel should also note that even where an ex parte application is justified on grounds of urgency, the application should ordinarily be made ex parte on notice unless the giving of notice is likely to defeat the application by reason of delay or may precipitate the action the application is designed to prevent: see the Supreme Court Practice 1999 Ed. at 29\/1A\/21 and 29\/1A\/25. Where prior notice of an ex parte application is not given, the supporting affidavit should ordinarily explain why. Implementation of Orders 8.  Counsel are reminded that in the case of Orders requiring action from the Registry (e.g. the setting of a date, or an order requiring the removal of a matter from the list) the attorney or firm having carriage of the Order should write to the Registry asking that the order be implemented. Dated this 6th day of January 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014 JURY TRIALS It is fundamental to a fair trial that jurors must have regard only to the evidence presented to them by the Court in arriving at their verdict. Jurors are invariably warned by the trial judge that taking account of irrelevant or extraneous matters will lead to unjust verdicts. This fundamental principle applies with equal force to information that jurors might themselves encounter by use of the internet and by use of \u201csocial media\u201d. Miscarriages of justice have been known to occur when jurors resort to these sources of information during the course of trials. The following direction is aimed at ensuring that jurors are advised against this improper practice and of the likely consequencies. Jurors will be advised by the trial judge at the commencement of the trial that they must not post on the internet or in any social media any reference to the trial nor should they search the internet for anything related to the case. It is of critical importance that jurors take account only of evidence presented to them in court or information brought to their attention under a direction of the court. Jurors will be warned that any failure to comply with these directions will be treated as a contempt of court. The following form of words may be used to convey these important messages at the discretion of the trial judge: \u201cEveryone is entitled to a fair trial and to have their guilt or innocence decided only on the evidence put before the court during the trial; as a member of the jury in this case, you have sworn to try it in a fair and impartial manner. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Jurors must not look for information about the case themselves. You must not search the internet or any other source for information that may affect your consideration of the case. You must not take any account of any information that comes to your attention about the trial other than the evidence with which you are presented in court or which is brought to your attention under the direction of the court. Jurors are not to post on the internet or in any \u201csocial media\u201d (such as Face Book or Twitter) any reference at all to the trial. This includes any allegations, evidence or arguments during the trial. Any accessing of the internet or any posting of comments on the social media will be a contempt of court and could result in you being sent to prison or fined.\u201d Dated this 6th day of January 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014 ORDERS FOR SALES BY PRIVATE TREATY PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d). This Practice Direction supplements Practice Direction No. 5 of 2012. PREAMBLE Applications to the court for orders sanctioning sales by private treaty pursuant to Section 77 of the RLL, are sought by way of variation of the operation of Section 75 which allows the chargee to sell by way of public auction acting \u201cin good faith and hav(ing) regard to the interests of the chargor.\u201d Practice Direction No. 5 of 2012 directs that the objectives of a public auction as contemplated by Section 75 can be achieved by way of listing on the Multiple Listing System by reference to a reserve sale price that reflects the fair market value of the property. This will usually be achieved by using two independent valuations (taking the median of the values where the valuers disagree). Where the reserve price is not met within a reasonable time, the discretion in the chargee to instruct its agent gradually to lower the reserve until the true market price is realised, must also be recognised. 1. This practice direction confirms that an application for leave to sell by private treaty will not be entertained unless there has been a fair attempt to market the property for sale on the open market, including by way of public auction in keeping with Practice Direction No. 5 of 2012. 2. Where that open market process yields an offer which the chargee wishes to accept but is concerned (for reason that the offer price is significantly below the reserve price or for some other good reason) to seek the sanction of the court pursuant to Section 77, such an application may be granted at GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the discretion of the court. The court will, however, always be mindful of the fact that a chargee is not obliged to seek the sanction of the court in the exercise of its power of sale granted by Section 75 and will reserve its discretion as to the appropriate order for costs that it might make upon any application. 3. Where it is represented to the listing officer that an application must be taken urgently in order to comply with contractual deadlines for closure of sales, the listing officer may provide an urgent listing. Dated this 6th day of January 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013) 1.  Where, in accordance with the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10) (as amended), the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the Court, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such and listed within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time). 2.  In determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court may consider whether the taxation can thereby be dealt with more expeditiously taking account of the amount of the bill and the complexity of the taxation. 3.  The Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10), the allocation to a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of Court also taking into account the likely nature and complexity of the taxation and any potential for a conflict of interest between any of the taxing officers and any of the parties involved in the taxation. 4.  Where the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10) any of the parties to the taxation may make representations to the Clerk of the Court regarding any potential conflict of interests with any of the taxing officers listed in Schedule 1 at any time up to 7 days after the lodging of the bill for taxation. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.  The Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10 days of the lodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of the identity of the taxing officer and the fees that are payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) of Part C of the First Schedule to the Rules. No taxation will commence until the fees payable have been received. 6.  Where fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b), the parties will be notified by the Clerk of Court of the amount payable within 7 days of the receipt by the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The certificate will not be issued until these fees are paid. 7.  Where appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate the functions described under paragraphs 3- 6 to a Deputy Clerk of Court or to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. Dated this 17th day of January 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 TAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE (Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1)) December 2013 Mrs. Delene Cacho (Legal Aid and general civil cases) January 2014 Mrs. Eileen Nervik Q.C. Huw Moses O.B.E. William Helfrecht Derek Jones GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Amended) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Amended) 1. Authority 1.1. This Practice Direction is made by the Chief Justice in accordance with Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10), the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal authorizes a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the Court, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such as listed within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time) pursuant to Order 62, Rule 3 of the Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) (\\\"the GCR\\\"). 2. Commencement 2.1. This Practice Direction No. 5 of 2014 Amendment will come into effect on the 21st January 2021. 3. Introduction 3.1. In furtherance of the objectives of GCR Order 62 Rule 3, Legal Aid Act, 2015 Section 28(7) and Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10), this Practice Direction provides for the filing and an assigned attorney-at-law shall in due course submit their bill of costs to the Clerk of the Court for taxation. The filing and processing of these documents will improve access to justice by increasing efficiencies, timeliness and reducing costs. 3.2. This Practice Direction applies to all existing cases as well as new cases commenced on or after 21st January 2021 and can be used to file documents to commence or continue cases that are already before the Court. 3.3. The filing of documents for taxation means must be done in accordance with this Practice Direction. 3.4. Where, in accordance with the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10), the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the Court, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such and listed within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time). 3.5. In determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court may consider whether the taxation can thereby be dealt with more expeditiously taking account of the amount of the bill and the complexity of the taxation. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.6. The Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10), the allocation to a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of Court also taking into account the likely nature and complexity of the taxation and any potential for a conflict of interest between any of the taxing officers and any of the parties involved in the taxation. 3.7. Where the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10) any of the parties to the taxation may make representations to the Clerk of the Court regarding any potential conflict of interests with any of the taxing officers listed in Schedule 1 at any time up to 7 days after the lodging of the bill for taxation. 3.8. The Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10 days of the lodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of the identity of the taxing officer and the fees that are payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) of Part C of the First Schedule to the Rules. No taxation will commence until the fees payable have been received. 3.9. Where fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b), the parties will be notified by the Clerk of Court of the amount payable within 7 days of the receipt by the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The certificate will not be issued until these fees are paid. 3.10. Where appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate the functions described under paragraphs 3- 6 to a Deputy Clerk of Court or to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. Dated this 21st day of January 2021 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C. Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Amended) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Schedule 1 TAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE (Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1)) December 2013 Mrs. Delene Cacho (Legal Aid and general civil cases) \u2013 retired effective January 2021 January 2014 Mrs. Eileen Nervik Q.C. \u2013 retired effective January 2021 Huw Moses O.B.E. William Helfrecht \u2013 retired effective 2019 Derek Jones January 2021 Derek Jones (Legal Aid and general civil cases) Robert Jones (Legal Aid and general civil cases) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014 Procedure for making Summary Court Applications pursuant to the Police Act (as amended and revised) on Weekends and Public Holidays Where an application for an order to extend the period of time a person may be kept in detention by the police requires to be made to a Summary Court on a weekend or a public holiday, the following protocol will be observed:- 1.  The responsible officer of the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service (\u201cRCIPS\u201d) shall communicate the need for an application to Crown Counsel, who will in turn contact the \u201cdesignated court officer\u201d (that is, the person identified by the Court Administrator or Clerk of Court for that purpose) and for these purposes telephone and email contact details of the designated court officer will be provided by notice to all interested parties. An appointed time for appearance for a hearing before a Summary Court will then be provided. 2.  The responsible officer of the RCIPS must notify the Defence Counsel identified by the detainee to represent that detainee of the appointed time for attendance before the court. 3.  When contacting the designated court officer, Crown Counsel will a.  confirm that notice of the intended application was served on the detainee b.  provide the name of Defence Counsel (if any) to be present, and c.  advise whether an Interpreter is required for the hearing. 4. The designated court officer will ensure that a.  the designated Magistrate is contacted as soon as possible after being advised of the time for the hearing GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 b.  all necessary arrangements for the conduct of the hearing are made c.  Crown Counsel (and when known Defence Counsel) are advised of the courtroom and time fixed for the hearing d.  the attendance of a court Interpreter, should one be required, is arranged and e. the attendance of a RCIPS Auxiliary Officer assigned to the courts as security officer is arranged. 5.  The responsible officer of the RCIPS will transport the detainee to and (where an extension of the period of detention is allowed) from Court and will liaise with the RCIPS Auxiliary Officer for access to the Courthouse. Dated this 30th day of April 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 (Remand Proceedings by way of teleconference) - Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) 1.  Where the Court directs that remand proceedings be conducted by teleconference in accordance with section 60 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) (\u201cCPC\u201d), an accused person confined in prison will appear before the court by live television link from His Majesty\u2019s Prisons (\u201cHMP\u201d) whether or not also represented by counsel present in court. Scheduled Hearings 2.  Where the Court makes a direction in accordance with section 60 of the CPC, hearings by teleconference will be scheduled on Tuesdays and Fridays, or on any other day that Criminal Mention Hearings are fixed. 3.  Teleconference hearings between the Court and HMP will commence at 12 noon, or at any other time fixed by the presiding Magistrate and communicated to the parties in advance. 4.  The time allotted for the appearance of each defendant on a remand hearing will be no more than 15 minutes unless the Court otherwise directs. Unscheduled Hearings 5.  Where it becomes apparent that an unscheduled hearing by teleconference would be the most appropriate way to proceed, the Director of Prisons or Defence Counsel may request that the Court so directs. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.  A request for an unscheduled hearing must be made to the \u201cdesignated court officer\u201d (that is, the person identified for that purpose by the Court Administrator or Clerk of Court. The designated officer (to be identified in Court Lists published weekly and available at www.judicial.ky) will seek the appropriate direction of the Chief Magistrate. 7. Where the Court so directs, the designated court officer will inform or direct that all persons concerned are informed of the date and time fixed for the hearing, and will ensure that arrangements are made for the hearing; including co-ordination with the Director of Prisons. Service of Documents 8.  If during the course of a teleconference hearing it becomes necessary or appropriate to serve documents (such as prosecution evidentiary or disclosure material) on a defendant who is confined at HMP, the documents may be served on Defence Counsel representing the defendant in court and Defence Counsel will be responsible for the delivery of the documents to the defendant at HMP unless the court is persuaded to otherwise direct. 9.  Where the defendant is unrepresented, Crown Counsel will be responsible for the delivery of the documents to the defendant at HMP unless the court is persuaded to otherwise direct. Pre-Court Conferences 10.  Where a hearing has been scheduled in accordance with section 60 of the CPC, the Court will facilitate one half-hour private Pre-Court Conference by television link between Defence Counsel and the respective defendants detained at HMP. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 11.  Such a Pre-Court Conference shall be attended by Defence Counsel and by the assigned social worker or probation officer (if Defence Counsel so indicates in advance on behalf of the defendant) and no other person will be permitted to attend unless the Court so directs. 12. Pre-Court Conferences may be scheduled on Mondays, Wednesdays or Thursdays between the hours of 2.00 pm and 4.00 pm by contacting the designated officer who will allot the respective times for use of the court television link facilities. Requests for links for Pre \u2013Court Conferences must be made at least 24 hours in advance to allow notification by the courts to HMP to ensure that the defendant will be produced at the other end of the link at HMP at the time arranged. 13. If for any reason it is not possible for the Court to facilitate a Pre-Court Conference, Defence Counsel will nonetheless remain responsible for taking such instructions from defendants as may be necessary for their representation at the scheduled remand hearing. Co-ordination with HMP: Scheduled hearings and Pre-Court Conferences 14.  By no later than 2:00 pm on the day prior to any Scheduled hearing or any Pre-Court Conference, the Courts will notify the Director of Prisons by email or fax of the name(s) of the defendant(s) who will appear by television link and of the time allotted for the appearance of each defendant, and the Director of Prisons will be responsible for ensuring the production of the defendant for the appearance at HMP at the appointed time. These email (or fax) notices will be copied to the respective Defence Counsel and to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 15.  By no later than 9:30 am on the morning of any hearing (or in the case of a Pre-Court Conference, at least half hour before the appointed time) the Director of Prisons will be responsible for notifying the designated officer of any anticipated difficulty with ensuring the appearance of a defendant for the time appointed for that defendant\u2019s appearance. 16.  By no later than 9:45 am, the court will be notified of any such difficulty to allow for the making of any alternative directions as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Dated this 30th day of April 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) (GCR O. 52) (GCR O.6(11) COMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT \u2013 FAMILY DIVISION and IN \u201cCOURT OF PROTECTION MATTERS\u201d 1.  It is a fundamental principle of the administration of justice in the Cayman Islands that applications for committal for contempt should be heard and decided in public, that is, in open court. 2.  The Grand Court when dealing with matters concerning the property of a person under disability or when dealing with the applications arising out of proceedings relating to a child,4 is vested with a discretionary power to hear a committal application in private protection matters. This discretion should be exercised only in exceptional cases where it is necessary in the interest of justice. The fact that the committal application is being made in respect of a protection matter does not of itself justify the application being heard in private. Moreover the fact that the hearing of the committal application may involve the disclosure of material which ought not to be published does not of itself justify hearing the application in private if such publication can be restrained by an appropriate order. 3.  If, in an exceptional case, a committal application is heard in private and the court finds that a person has committed a contempt of court it must state in public as required by Order 52 rule 6(2) of the Grand Court Rules: 4 That is: in terms of GCR O.52(5)(i)(a) in relation to children: \u201cwhere the application arises out of proceedings relating to the wardship or adoption of an infant or wholly or mainly to the guardianship, custody, maintenance or upbringing of a child, or rights of access to a child\u201d. GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (a)  the name of that person; (b)  in general terms the nature of the contempt of court in respect of which the committal order [\u201ccommittal order\u201d for this purpose includes a suspended committal order] is being made; and (c)  the punishment being imposed. This is mandatory; there are no exceptions. There are never any circumstances in which any one may be committed to custody without these matters being publicly stated. 4.  Committal applications should at the outset be listed and heard in public. This applies to every committal application without exception. The application should be shown in the public court list as follows: FOR HEARING IN OPEN COURT Application by [full names of applicant] for The Committal to prison of [full names of the person alleged to be in contempt] 5.  Whenever the court decides to exercise its discretion to sit in private the judge should, before continuing the hearing in private, give reasons in public for doing so. At the conclusion of any hearing in private the judge should sit in public to comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 3. If the judge, having decided to continue in private, adjourns the hearing to a future date the application should be shown in the public court list as: FOR HEARING IN PRIVATE Application by [full names of applicant] for The Committal to prison of [full names of the person alleged to be in contempt] Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.  A person who is not a party to the proceedings is not entitled as of right to a copy of the application notice. The court may, however, authorise such a person to obtain a copy. If in an exceptional case the court decides that a copy of the application notice is not to be made available to a person who requests it, the judge must set out in writing the reasons for doing so. 7.  Whenever a committal application is being heard in public the judge and the attorneys should be robed. DATED this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) (Section 9(4) of the Children Act (as amended and revised) COURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S REPORTS 1. Duties of reporter 1.1  Where the court directs an enquiry and report by a court welfare officer,5 the Children Act (as amended and revised) provides6 that it is the function of that officer to assist the court by investigating the circumstances of the child, or children, concerned and the important persons in their lives, to report what that officer sees and hears, to offer the court that officer\u2019s assessment of the situation and, where appropriate to make a recommendation. In such circumstances, it is not the role of the welfare officer to attempt conciliation, although that officer may encourage the parties to settle their differences if the likelihood of a settlement arises during the course of that officer\u2019s enquiries. 5 A social worker, employed by the Department of Children and Family Services or such other person as the Department considers appropriate. 6 Section 9 of the 2012 Revision which also (in subsection (4) provides that it shall be the duty of Department of Children and Family Services to comply with the direction of the Court. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1.2  The report must be filed by the court welfare officer at the court by or on the ordered date. If exceptional circumstances necessitate an extension of time to enable completion of the report, the welfare officer must make a timely written request to the court. The court welfare officer, in that officer\u2019s written request for an extension of time to file the report, shall set out detailed reasons why this is required, the date that the case was allocated to the court welfare officer and the requested new date for submission. It is not to be assumed that an extension will be granted and the welfare officer must proceed to meet the deadline unless and until the judge grants the extension. 1.3 Where in the course of preparing a report in private law proceedings, the court welfare officer becomes aware that a child may have been abused, the reporter is not fettered from exercising that officer\u2019s independent discretion in reporting that officer\u2019s findings to the Department of Children and Family Services or to the police. However, that officer must inform the Judge of the steps that officer has taken at the earliest opportunity so that the Judge can consider the impact of the development and the need for consequential directions. 2. Confidential nature of the report 2.1 The following wording must be boldly endorsed on all court welfare reports filed in Family Division proceedings and on all copies which are supplied to the parties and their attorneys. \u201cThis report has been prepared for the court and should be treated as confidential. It mustnot be shown nor its contents revealed to any person other than a party or a legal adviserto such a party. Such legal adviser may make use of the report in connection with an application for legal aid.\u201d GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3. General considerations when requesting a court welfare officer\u2019s report 3.1  When a report is ordered, the court shall promptly complete a written Referral Form 7 which shall be promptly submitted to the Department of Children and Family Services. The Referral Form shall contain a very brief note of the background to the case, details of the order\/directions made at the time of the referral, the required submission date for the report and an indication whether the court welfare officer is required to attend the hearing. Subject to any order that the court may make, if a party no longer requires the attendance of the court welfare officer at the hearing that party must notify the court at least five clear working days prior to the hearing. 3.2 The court shall specify in the Referral Form those matters on which the report is to be made. 3.3 Such specifications will not prevent the reporting officer from bringing to the notice of the court any other matters which the reporting officer considers that the court should have in mind. 3.4 The court when submitting the Referral Form to the Department of Children and Family Services shall attach a copy of the Background Information Form8 to facilitate the court welfare officer in making initial contact with the parties. 3.5 Before ordering a report, the court should balance the need for a report against the effect of delay caused by the preparation of the report. 3 Appendix 1. 4 Appendix 2. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.6 In deciding whether a report should be ordered, consideration should be given to: (a)  determining what issues require a report and how important they are; (b)  whether these issues are likely to be resolved by mediation. If they can, the court should consider whether a decision on ordering a report should be postponed until mediation has taken place; (c)  whether the report is likely to produce factual information which the court needs to resolve the issues; (d)  whether the court, depending on the nature of the issues involved, needs professional advice; (e)  what delay will the preparation of the report cause and how detrimental would that be; and (f)  whether it is appropriate to delay a decision on whether to order a report. 3.7  Bearing in mind that contested Children Act (as amended and revised) cases often take several days to be heard, in cases where the attendance of the reporting officer is required, the parties shall agree a convenient date and time for the reporting officer\u2019s attendance before the court. Dated this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 APPENDIX 1 REFERRAL FORM \u2013 COURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S REPORT For the Attention of: The Cayman Islands Department of Children and Family Services Please note: Section 9 (4) of the Children Act (as amended and revised) provides that \u201cit shall be the duty of the Department to comply with any request for a report under this section.\u201d Cause No \/20 Judge: Applicant: Respondent: Child: (DOB ) \u2013Aged - Male\/Female Referred to: Investigative Counselling Report on issue of requested: TO BE FILED NO LATER THAN__________________ \u2013 No extensions will be given without permission of the Court, to be granted only upon written application to the Court by the Court Welfare Officer Interim Special Request Comprehensive Order: (1) (directions and orders made) . Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (2) (3) (4) (5)  The reporting officer(, who will be notified of the date,) is to attend the final hearing(at    am\/pm on       day of         20  ) of this matter unless notified otherwise by the Court. (6)  The parties are to notify the Court by no later than 5 working days prior to the final hearing if they do not require the Reporting Officer to attend the hearing Further Details: (set out brief background) The Court seeks a report in relation to The Welfare officer is requested to Report ordered by: Date:             day of                                  20 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Appendix 2 GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS FAMILY DIVISION BACKGROUND DETAILS FORM CAUSE NO.____________________ PARTIES: Applicant: Respondent: __________________________     vs.  ____________________________ Applicant\u2019s Address\/ Contact Details:  Respondent\u2019s Address\/Contact Details: House\/Apt #:_________________ House\/Apt #:_____________________ Street: ______________________ Street:__________________________ District: _____________________ District:_________________________ Work Phone: _________________ Work Phone: ____________________ Cell Phone:___________________ Cell Phone: _____________________ Email: ______________________ Email:__________________________ Other Email: _________________ Other Email: _____________________ Applicant\u2019s Attorney: Respondent\u2019s Attorney: Name: _____________________  Name:__________________________ Firm: ______________________  Firm: __________________________ Phone: _____________________  Phone: _________________________ Email: _____________________  Email: _________________________ Dated this        day of                               20      . Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) COURT BUNDLES IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT 1. Introduction 1.1  In Re X and Y (Bundles) [2008] 2 FLR 2053, Munby J (as he was then) issued a stern warning in open court to all practitioners, pointing out that far too often the requirements of the 2006 Practice Direction in England and Wales concerning court bundles were not observed and that this was unacceptable. Munby J indicated that orders for costs can be made against either the party in default or against the defaulting lawyers. Furthermore, he warned that in particularly flagrant cases, defaulters may be publicly identified in open court. 1.2 Regrettably, the concerns expressed are equally applicable to the Cayman Islands due to frequent non-compliance with Practice Direction No. 2\/96. Bundles are often incomplete or not up to date. Bundles often arrive late or not at all. Too often bundles, skeleton arguments and other preliminary documents are handed in on the evening before or on the morning of the hearing. 1.3 This Practice Direction is issued to achieve consistency in the preparation of court bundles and in respect of other related matters heard in the Family Division of the Grand Court. The Practice Direction sets out very prescriptive requirements as to the content and format of the \u2018preliminary documents\u2019 which are to be included in every bundle. This will enable the judge to embark upon the necessary pre-reading in a structured and focused way and thereby, at the outset of the hearing, GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 allowing the parties to proceed immediately to the heart of the matter, without the need for any substantial opening andwith the parties focusing upon previously identified issues. The practice direction will also ensure that the bundles are paginated, in an organised form and encourage careful consideration to what documents should actually be included in the bundle. The objective is to shorten the length of hearings and to ensure that litigants who comply with practice directions do not suffer delay and prejudice as a result of the default or poor preparation of others. 2. Application of the practice direction 2.1  The following practice applies to all hearings in the Family Division of the Grand Court except for: (a)  cases listed for one hour or less; and (b)  the hearing of any urgent application where and to the extent that it is impracticable to comply with the practice. 3. Responsibility for the Preparation of the bundle 3.1 A bundle for the use of the court at the hearing shall be provided by the party in the position of applicant at the hearing (or, if there are crossapplications, by the party whose application was first in time) or, if that person is a litigant in person, by the first listed respondent who is not a litigant in person. 3.2 The party preparing the bundle shall paginate it. If possible the contents of the bundle shall be agreed by all parties. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. Contents of the bundle 4.1  The bundle shall contain copies of all documents relevant to the hearing, in chronological order from the front of the bundle, paginated and indexed, and divided into separate sections (each section being separately paginated) as follows: (a)  preliminary documents (see paragraph 4.2) and any other case management documents required by any other practice direction; (b)  applications and orders; (c)  statements and affidavits (which must be dated in the top right corner of the front page); (d)  care plans (where appropriate); (e)  experts\u2019 reports and other reports (including those of a social worker or children\u2019s guardian ad litem); and (f) other documents, divided into further sections as may be appropriate. 4.2  At the commencement of the bundle there shall be inserted the following documents (the preliminary documents): (a)  an up to date summary of the background to the hearing confined to those matters which are relevant to the hearing and the management of the case and limited, if practicable, to one A4 page;9 (b)  a statement of the issue or issues to be determined (1) at that hearing and (2) at the final hearing; (c)  a position statement by each party including a summary of the order or directions sought by that party (1) at that hearing and (2) at the final hearing; (d)  an up to date chronology, if it is a final hearing or if the summary under 4.2(a) is insufficient; 1 Note that GCR Order 66 r.1 provides that unless impracticable, every document prepared by a party for use in the Court must be on letter sized paper and suggests that A4 paper should only be used where unavoidable. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (e)  skeleton arguments, if appropriate, with copies of all authorities relied on; and (f)  a list of essential reading for that hearing. 4.3 Each of the preliminary documents shall state on the front page immediately below the heading the date when it was prepared and the date of the hearing for which it was prepared. 4.4 The summary of the background, statement of issues, chronology, position statement and any skeleton arguments shall be crossreferenced to the relevant pages of the bundle. 4.5 The summary of the background, statement of issues, chronology and reading list shall in the case of a final hearing, and shall so far as practicable in the case of any other hearing, each consist of a single document in a form agreed by all parties. Where the parties disagree as to the content the fact of their disagreement and their differing contentions shall be set out at the appropriate places in the document. 4.6 Where the nature of the hearing is such that a complete bundle of all documents is unnecessary, the bundle (which need not be repaginated) may comprise only those documents necessary for the hearing, but (a)  the summary (paragraph 4.2(a)) must commence with a statement that the bundle is limited or incomplete; and (b)  the bundle shall if reasonably practicable be in a form agreed by all parties. 4.7  Where the bundle is re-lodged in accordance with paragraph 8.2, before it is re-lodged: (a)  the bundle shall be updated as appropriate; and Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (b)  all superseded documents (and in particular all outdated summaries, statements of issues, chronologies, skeleton arguments and similar documents) shall be removed from the bundle. 5. Format of the bundle10 5.1  The bundle shall be contained in one or more A4 size ring binders (each ring binder being limited to no more than 350 pages). Bundles not exceeding 50 pages in length may be firmly stapled in the top left hand corner and shall be punched with a hole for filing. 5.2  All ring binders shall have clearly marked on the front and the spine: (a)  the title and number of the action; (b)  the court where the case has been listed; (c)  the hearing date and time; (d)  if known, the name of the judge hearing the case; and (e)  a description or index of the documents contained therein; and (f)  where there is more than one ring binder, a distinguishing letter (A, B, C etc). 6. Timetable for preparing and lodging the bundle 6.1 The party preparing the bundle shall, whether or not the bundle has been agreed, provide a paginated index to all other parties not less than 5 working days before the hearing. 6.2 The bundle (with the exception of the preliminary documents if and insofar as they are not then available) shall be lodged with the court not less than 3 working days before the hearing, or at such other time as may be specified by the judge. 2 See GCR Order 66 r.5 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.3 The preliminary documents shall be lodged with the court no later than 9.30 am on the day before the hearing and if the name of the judge is known, shall at the same time be sent by email to the judge\u2019s personal assistant. 7. Lodging the bundle 7.1  Unless the judge has given some other direction as to where the bundle in any particular case is to be lodged (for example a direction that the bundle is to be lodged with the judge\u2019s personal assistant) the bundle shall be lodged at the office of the Family Proceedings Unit at the Grand Court. 7.2 Any bundle sent to the court by post or courier shall be clearly addressed to the appropriate office and shall show the date and place of the hearing on the outside of any packaging as well as on the bundle itself. 7.3 Parties shall: (a)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are delivered personally, ensure that they obtain a receipt from the clerk\/court officer accepting it or them; (b)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are sent by post, ensure that they obtain proof of posting or dispatch; and (c)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are sent by courier obtain proof of delivery. The receipt (or proof of posting, dispatch or delivery, as the case may be) shall be brought to court on the day of the hearing and must be produced to the court if requested.If the receipt (or proof of posting dispatch or delivery) cannot be produced to the court the judge may: (i)  treat the bundle as having not been lodged; and (ii)  take the steps referred to in paragraph 11. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7.4  Bundles or preliminary documents delivered after 9.30 am on the day before the hearing will not be accepted by the Family Proceedings Unit and shall be delivered directly to the judge\u2019s personal assistant. 8. Removing and re-lodging the bundle 8.1  Following completion of the hearing the party responsible for the bundle shall retrieve it from the court immediately or, if that is not practicable, (for instance, if needed by the judge for writing a ruling or judgment), shall collect it from the court within 5 working days. Bundles which are not collected in due time may be destroyed. 8.2  The bundle shall be re-lodged for the next and any further hearings in accordance with the provisions of this practice direction and in a form which complies with paragraph 4.7. 9. Time Estimates 9.1  In every case a time estimate (which shall be inserted at the front of the bundle) shall be prepared which shall so far as practicable be agreed by all parties and shall: (a)  specify separately: (i)  the time estimated to be required for judicial pre-reading; and (ii)  the time required for hearing all evidence and submissions; and (b)  be prepared on the basis that before they give evidence all witnesses will have read all relevant filed statements and reports. 9.2  Once a case has been listed, any change in time estimates shall be notified immediately by telephone (and then immediately confirmed in writing) to the Listing Office. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 10. Taking cases out of the list 10.1 As soon as it becomes known that a hearing will no longer be required, whether as a result of the parties reaching agreement or for any other reason, the parties and their representatives shall immediately notify the court by telephone and by letter. The letter, which shall wherever possible be a joint letter sent on behalf of all parties with their signatures applied or appended, shall include: (a)  a short background summary of the case; (b)  the written consent of each party who consents and, where a party does not consent, details of the steps which have been taken to obtain that party\u2019s consent and, where known, an explanation of why that consent has not been given; (c)  a draft of the order being sought; and (d)  enough information to enable the court to decide: (i)  whether to take the case out of the list; and (ii)  whether to make the proposed order. 11. Penalties for failure to comply with the practice direction 11.1 Failure to comply with any part of this practice direction may result in the judge removing the case from the list or putting the case further back in the list and may also result in a \u201cwasted costs\u201d order or some other adverse costs order. DATED this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) ARRIVAL OF CHILDREN IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS BY AIR 1.  Where a person seeks an order for the return to that person of children about to arrive in the Cayman Islands by air and desires to have information to enable that person to meet the aircraft, the Judge should be asked to include in that Judge\u2019s order a direction that the airline or person operating the flight, and, if that person has the information, the immigration officer at the appropriate airport, should supply such information to that person. 2.  To obtain such information in such circumstances in a case where a person already has an order for the return to that person of children, that person should apply to a judge ex parte for directions for those purposes. DATED this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) CONTRIBUTION ORDERS 1.  Paragraph 19(6) of Schedule 2 to the Children Act (as amended and revised) provides that where \u2013 (a)  a contribution order is in force; (b)  the Department of Children and Family Services serve another contribution notice; and (c)  the contributor and the Department reach an agreement under paragraph 18(7) in respect of that other contribution notice, the effect of the agreement shall be to discharge the order from the date on which it is agreed that the agreement shall take effect. 2.  Where the Department of Children and Family Services notifies the court of an agreement reached under paragraph 19(6) of Schedule 2 to the Children Act (as amended and revised), the notification must be sent in writing to the designated officer of the court. DATED this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie QC, Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) RECOMMENDED PRACTICES IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT WHEN INITIATING DIRECT JUDICIAL COMMUNICATION WITH A JUDGE IN A FOREIGN COURT Introduction Judges in the Cayman Islands may have to communicate directly with judges in foreign jurisdictions, in particular in cases involving allegations of abduction of children. This may happen when there are concurrent proceedings relating to the same parties in each jurisdiction. It involves communication between judges, with the knowledge of the parties, possibly in a joint hearing with the parties and their attorneys at law present. The purpose of the communication is to coordinate and harmonise the proceedings so that a resolution of all of the outstanding issues can be reached in a just, timely and cost effective manner. The communications do not relate to the merits of either proceedings. This Practice Direction and the guidance it contains are intended to establish a consistent and fair procedure which does not interfere with the judicial independence of either court. 1. Due process and transparency 1.1 Every Judge engaging in direct judicial communication must respect the law in that Judge\u2019s jurisdiction. 1.2 Notification of the parties about communication: - The parties and\/or attorneys at law involved should be notified in advance if possible of the nature of the proposed communication provided that such notice does not unduly delay the process. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1.3 Record of the communication \u2014 (a)  Judges involved in a particular communication should keep a record of what was discussed preferably using a recording device or court reporter. (b)  The record should be available to the parties and the judge in the other jurisdiction if requested. (c) Any correspondence, emails or other written communication between judges should be preserved for the record. 1.4 Participation of the parties \u2014 (a)  If both judges involved in the communication agree, the parties or their attorney at law may be permitted to be present during the communication. (b)  If both judges involved in the communication agree to permit one party or attorney at law to be present, then the other party or attorney at law should be permitted to be present. (c)  Unless it would unduly delay the process, parties or their attorney at law would be encouraged to be present for example via conference call facility. (d)  If both judges involved in the communication agree, the parties or their attorney at law may be permitted to speak during the communication. (e)  If the judges involved in the communication agree to permit one party or attorney-at-law to speak, then the other party or attorney at law should be permitted a chance to answer. (f)  Consideration may be given to allow the attorneys at law to submit a question or provide information relating to the proposed communication. 1.5 Language \u2014 Because of the necessity for clarity and precision, where there are language differences, and where interpretation is needed, professional interpreters are preferred. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1.6 Consensus or Arrangements: - Confirmation of any consensus or arrangements reached as between judges should be confirmed in writing and made available to the parties. 2. Nature of the request to communicate 2.1  Is there a question of foreign law or procedure to discuss with a judge in the foreign jurisdiction? a)  Is there a case pending before the foreign court? b)  If so, is there a need to speak with the judge who actually handled portions of the case, or will any judge in the foreign jurisdiction suffice? c)  If no case is pending, consider the difficulty in finding a judge with whom to communicate in the foreign jurisdiction. In this instance, if the case is a Hague Convention case, if there is a Hague Network judge, consider contacting that judge. 2.2  The judge involved in the communication should avoid discussions with the foreign judge about the merits of the case. 2.3  If it is a Hague Convention case, can the question be answered or dealt with by the Central Authority in your jurisdiction or the Central Authority in the foreign jurisdiction? If it can, consider having the Central Authority address the issue or obtain the information. 2.4 Specific examples of questions of foreign law or procedure that may arise in Hague Convention cases include \u2014 (a)  scheduling of the case in the foreign jurisdiction (i)  making of interim orders, e.g. support, protection orders; (ii)  availability of expedited hearings; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (b)  availability of protective orders for the child or either parent; (c)  can the foreign court accept and enforce undertakings offered by the parties in your jurisdiction? (d)  is the foreign court willing to entertain a mirror order (same order in both jurisdictions) if the parties are in agreement? (e)  are criminal charges pending in the foreign jurisdiction against an abducting parent? (f)  can the abducting parent return to the foreign jurisdiction if an order is made returning the child to that jurisdiction? (g)  what services are available to the family or the child upon the return of the child? (h) logistics of returning the child. 3. Setting up the communication and initiating the contact 3.1  Where appropriate, the initiating judge should invite the parties or their attorneys at law to make submissions as to whether there should be direct judicial communication and the nature of the communication; 3.2 If the initiating judge decides such communication should be made he\/she may do so by \u2014 (a)  contacting the judge directly; or (b)  contacting the Hague Network judge for the Cayman Islands who will assist in facilitating communication between the initiating judge and the appropriate judge in the other jurisdiction. 3.3  The initial communication should be in writing (fax or e-mail) and should identify \u2014 (a)  the initiating judge; (b)  the nature of the case (with due regard to confidentiality concerns); (c)  the issue on which communication is sought; (d)  whether further documents should be exchanged; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (e)  when the communication should occur (with due regard to time differences); (f)  any specific questions which the initiating judge would like answered; (g)  any other pertinent matters. 3.4 Unless the initiating judge decides otherwise, all written communications should be copied to the parties or their attorney-atlaw. 3.5 If the other jurisdiction is not English speaking, the initiating judge should make their best efforts to have the initial communication appropriately translated. DATED this 2nd day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) INHERENT JURISDICTION (INCLUDING WARDSHIP) PROCEEDINGS 1. The Nature of Inherent Jurisdiction Proceedings 1.1  It is the duty of the court under its inherent jurisdiction to ensure that a child who is the subject of proceedings is protected and properly taken care of. The court may in exercising its inherent jurisdiction make any order or determine any issue in respect of a child unless limited by case law or statute. Such proceedings should not be commenced unless it is clear that the issues concerning the child cannot be resolved under the Children Act (as amended and revised). 1.2 The court may under its inherent jurisdiction, in addition to all of the orders which can be made in family proceedings, make a wide range of injunctions for the child\u2019s protection of which the following are the most common \u2013 (a)  orders to restrain publicity; (b)  orders to prevent an undesirable association; (c)  orders relating to medical treatment; (d)  orders to protect abducted children, or children where the case has another substantial foreign element; and (e)  orders for the return of children to and from another state. 1.3  The court\u2019s wardship jurisdiction is part of and not separate from the court\u2019s inherent jurisdiction. The distinguishing characteristics of wardship are that \u2013 (a)  custody of a child who is a ward is vested in the court; and (b)  although day to day care and control of the ward is given to an individual or to the Department of Children and Family Services, Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 no important step can be taken in the child\u2019s life without the court\u2019s consent. 2. Parties 2.1 Where the child has formed or is seeking to form an association, considered to be undesirable, with another person, that other person should not be made a party to the application. Such a person may be made a respondent only to an application within the proceedings for an injunction or committal. Such a person should not be added to the title of the proceedings nor allowed to see any documents other than those relating directly to the proceedings for the injunction or committal. That person should be allowed time to obtain representation and any injunction should in the first instance extend over a few days only. 3. Removal from jurisdiction 3.1  A child who is a ward of court may not be removed from the Cayman Islands without the court\u2019s permission. Practice Direction No. 16 of 2014 (International Child Abduction) deals in detail with locating and protecting children at risk of unlawful removal. 3.2 Where care and control has been given to the Department of Children and Family Services, or to an individual, it is permissible for the court to give general leave to make arrangements to remove the ward for temporary visits abroad in suitable cases, thereby obviating the need to make application for leave, each time it is desired to remove the ward from the jurisdiction. General leave is conditional upon the party obtaining the order lodging at the registry of the Family Division at least seven days before each proposed departure: (a)  a written consent in unqualified terms by the other party or parties to the ward\u2019s leaving the Cayman Islands for the period proposed; (b)  a statement in writing, giving the date on which it is proposed that the ward shall leave the Cayman Islands, the period of absence and the whereabouts of the ward during such absence; and, unless GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 otherwise directed, a written undertaking by the applicant to return the ward to the Cayman Islands at the end of the proposed period of absence. On compliance with these requirements a certificate, for production to the Department of Immigration, stating that the conditions of the order have been complied with, may be obtained from the Registry. 4. Interviewing the Ward for the Proceedings 4.1  A ward may be seen by a welfare officer appointed by the court for the purposes of preparation of a welfare report, or by that ward\u2019s Guardian Ad Litem for instructions to an attorney for the purposes of presenting that ward\u2019s case. In those circumstances leave is not required. For an independent reporter (being a person appointed by a party to report to the court) seeking to interview a ward of court, leave of the court must be obtained. 5. Criminal Proceedings 5.1  Where a child has been interviewed by the police in connection with contemplated criminal proceedings and the child subsequently becomes a ward of court, the permission of the court deciding the wardship proceedings (\u201cthe wardship court\u201d) is not required for the child to be called as a witness in the criminal proceedings; provided any necessary leave of the trial court is obtained. 5.2  Where the police need to interview a child who is already a ward of court, an application must , other than in the exceptional cases referred to in paragraph 5.5, be made to the wardship court for permission for the police to do so. Where permission is given the order should, unless there is some special reason to the contrary, give permission for any number of interviews which may be required by the prosecution or the police. If a need arises to conduct any interview beyond the permission contained in the order, a further application must be made. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5.3  The above applications must be made with notice to all parties. 5.4  Where a person may become the subject of a criminal investigation and it is considered necessary for the child who is a ward of court to be interviewed without that person knowing that the police are making inquiries, the application for permission to interview the child may be made without notice to that party. Notice should, however, where practicable be given to the child\u2019s guardian. 5.5 There will be other occasions where the police need to deal with complaints, or alleged offences, concerning children who are wards of court where it is appropriate, if not essential, for action to be taken straight away without the prior permission of the wardship court, for example \u2013 (a)  serious offences against the child such as rape, where a medical examination and the collection of forensic evidence ought to be carried out promptly; (b)  where the child is suspected by the police of having committed a criminal act and the police wish to interview the child in respect of that matter; (c)  where the police wish to interview the child as a potential witness. 5.6  In such instances, the police should notify the parent or foster parent with whom the child is living or another \u2018appropriate adult\u201911 so that that adult has the opportunity of being present when the police interview the child. Additionally, if practicable the child\u2019s guardian (if one has been appointed) should be notified and invited to attend the police interview or to nominate a third party to attend on the guardian\u2019s behalf. 1 'appropriate adult' means (i) the parent, guardian or, if the juvenile is in the care of a local authority or voluntary organisation, a person representing that authority or organisation; (ii) a social worker of a local authority; (iii) failing these, some other responsible adult aged 18 or over who is not a police officer. A person, including a parent or guardian, should not be an appropriate adult if they are: (i) suspected of involvement in the offence; (ii) the victim; (ii) a witness; or (iv) involved in the investigation GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 A record of the interview or a copy of any statement made by the child should be supplied to the child's guardian. Where the child has been interviewed without the guardian\u2019s knowledge, the guardian should be informed at the earliest opportunity of this fact and (if it be the case) that the police wish to conduct further interviews. The wardship court should be informed of the situation at the earliest possible opportunity thereafter by the child's guardian, parent, foster parent (through the local authority) or other responsible adult. 6. Wards of Court: Disclosure of Evidence 6.1 In wardship cases, leave must be required to disclose evidential documents to persons who are not parties, e.g. psychiatrist, psychologist and medical experts or any other person. Disclosure without prior leave may be a contempt of court, and this is nonetheless the case where the purpose of the disclosure is only to obtain advice from the expert concerned as to whether the relevant expert evidence would be forthcoming or would be helpful to the court. 7. Wards of Court: Psychiatric, Psychological or Medical Examination 7.1 It is a firmly established principle in wardship cases that the ward should not be subjected to psychiatric or psychological examination without leave of the court. 7.2 An order for leave should normally be made only if the minor is separately represented and that minor\u2019s representative supports the application or if the application is supported by the Department of Children and Family Services if they have the care or supervision of the ward. 7.3 An order for leave should not normally be made unless there is or is suspected to be a specific and identifiable problem or potential problem on which the court needs assistance, which can only, or most conveniently be provided by a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7.4  Where the court has given such leave, the costs of the examination and report will normally be allowed on taxation, either inter partes or out of the legal aid fund, as appropriate, subject to the taxing officer\u2019s discretion as to the amount. 7.5  Where no such leave has been obtained, the court may refuse to admit the report in evidence and may direct that the costs of obtaining any examination and report should be disallowed. 7.6  If the necessary parental consent is given there is no need to apply for leave to subject a ward to an examination which is purely physical (i.e. when neither psychiatric nor psychological examination is involved). The termination of a pregnancy (for the protection of the life of the ward in keeping with section 141 of the Penal Code (as amended and revised), and other form of surgery or invasive procedure or the taking of a blood or other bodily sample from the ward will require leave. DATED this 30th day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 (GCR O.1, r.12) INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION (INCLUDING 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION) PART 1 1. Introduction 1.1  This Practice Direction explains what to do if a child has been brought to, or kept in, the Cayman Islands without the permission of anyone who has rights of custody in respect of the child in the country where the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention. It also explains what to do if a child has been taken out of, or kept out of, the Cayman Islands without the permission of a parent or someone who has rights of custody in respect of the child. These cases are called \u201cinternational child abduction cases\u201d and are dealt with in the Grand Court. This Practice Direction also explains what to do if you receive legal papers claiming that you have abducted a child. 1.2  If you have rights of custody in respect of a child and the child has been brought to the Cayman Islands without your permission, or has been brought here with your permission but the person your child is staying with is refusing to return the child, then you can apply to the Grand Court for an order for the return of the child. 1.3  How you make an application to the Grand Court, what evidence you need to provide and what orders you should ask the court to make are all explained in this Practice Direction. 1.4  If your child is under 16 years of age and has been brought to the Cayman Islands from a country which is a party (a \u201cState party\u201d) to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Abduction (\u201cthe 1980 Hague Convention\u201d) then you can make an application to the Grand Court for an order under that Convention for the return of your child to the State in which that child was habitually resident immediately before being removed or being kept away. This is explained in Part 2 below. 1.5  If your child is over 16 years of age and under 18, or has been brought to England or Wales from a country which is not a State party to the 1980 Hague Convention, then you can make an application for the return of your child under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court with respect to children. In exercising this jurisdiction over children, the Grand Court will make your child\u2019s welfare its paramount consideration. How to make an application under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court with respect to children is explained in Part 3 below. 1.6  It might be necessary for you to make an urgent application to the court if you are not sure where your child is, or you think that there is a risk that the person who is keeping your child away from you might take the child out of the Cayman Islands or hide them away. Part 4 below explains how to make an urgent application to the Grand Court for orders to protect your child until a final decision can be made about returning the child and also how to ask for help from the police and government agencies if you think your child might be taken out of the country. PART 2 2. Hague Convention Cases 2.1  States which are party to the 1980 Hague Convention have agreed to return children who have been either wrongfully removed from, or wrongfully retained away from, the State where they were habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention. There are very limited exceptions to this obligation. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.2 \u201cWrongfully removed\u201d or \u201cwrongfully retained\u201d means removed or retained in breach of rights of custody in respect of the child attributed to a person or a body or an institution. \u201cRights of custody\u201d are interpreted very widely (see paragraph 2.12 below). 2.3  The text of the 1980 Hague Convention and a list of Contracting States (that is, State parties) can be found on the website of The Hague Conference on Private International Law at http:\/\/www.hcch.net. The Cayman Islands are a party to the Convention. 2.4  In each State party there is a body called the Central Authority whose duty is to help people use the 1980 Hague Convention. 2.5  If you think that your child has been brought to, or kept in, the Cayman Islands, and your State is a State party to the 1980 Hague Convention, then you should get in touch with your own Central Authority who will help you to send an application for the return of your child to the Central Authority for Cayman Islands. However, you are not obliged to contact your own Central Authority. You may contact the Central Authority for the Cayman Islands directly, or you may simply instruct attorneys at law in the Cayman Islands to make an application for you. 2.6  The Central Authority for the Cayman Islands The Central Authority for the Cayman Islands is located in the Office of the Solicitor General\/Attorney General and its contact details are as follows: DMS House Genesis Close, George Town PO Box 907 Grand Cayman KY1-1103 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Tel: (345) 946-0022 Fax: (345) 946-0019 Contact: Suzanne Bothwell Email: Suzanne.Bothwell@gov.ky In an emergency (including out of normal working hours) contact should be made with the Grand Court on: (345) 323 0341 2.7  What the Central Authority will do When the Central Authority receives your application for the return of your child, unless you already have a legal representative in the Cayman Islands whom you want to act for you, it will send your application to an attorney at law whom it knows to be experienced in international child abduction cases and ask them to take the case for you. You will then be the attorney at law\u2019s client and the attorney at law will make an application for public funding to meet your legal costs if you are unable to pay. The attorney at law will then apply to the Grand Court for an order for the return of your child 2.8  Applying to the Grand Court - The Form and Content of Application An application to the Grand Court for an order under the 1980 Hague Convention must be made in the Registry of the Family Division in Form C53 (attached). 2.9  The application must include \u2013 (a)  the names and dates of birth of the children; (b)  the names of the children\u2019s parents or guardians; (c)  the whereabouts or suspected whereabouts of the children; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (d)  the interest of the applicant in the matter (e.g. mother, father, or person with whom the child lives and details of any order placing the child with that person); (e)  the reasons for the application; (f)  details of any proceedings (including proceedings not in the Cayman Islands, and including any legal proceedings which have finished) relating to the children; (g)  where the application is for the return of a child, the identity of the person alleged to have removed or retained the child and, if different, the identity of the person with whom the child is thought to be. 2.10 The application should be accompanied by all relevant documents including (but not limited to) \u2013 (a) an authenticated copy of any relevant decision or agreement; (b) a certificate or an affidavit from a Central Authority, or other competent authority of the State of the child\u2019s habitual residence, or from a qualified person, concerning the relevant law of that State. 2.11As the applicant you may also file a statement in support of the application, although usually your attorney at law will make and file a statement for you on your instructions. The statement must contain and be verified by a statement of truth in the following terms: \u201cI make this statement knowing that it will be placed before the court, and I confirm that to the best of my knowledge and belief its contents are true.\u201d Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.12 Rights of Custody \u201cRights of custody\u201d includes rights relating to the care of the child and, in particular, the right to determine the child\u2019s place of residence. Rights of custody may arise by operation of law (that is, they are conferred on someone automatically by the legal system in which they are living) or by a judicial or administrative decision or as a result of an agreement having legal effect. The rights of a person, an institution or any other body are a matter for the law of the State of the child\u2019s habitual residence, but it is for the State which is being asked to return the child to decide: (i) if those rights amount to rights of custody for the purposes of the 1980 Hague Convention; (ii) whether at the time of the removal or retention those rights were actually being exercised; and (iii) whether there has been a breach of those rights. 2.13 In the Cayman Islands a father who is not married to the mother of their child does not necessarily have \u201crights of custody\u201d in respect of the child. An unmarried father in the Cayman Islands who has parental responsibility for a child has rights of custody in respect of that child. In the case of an unmarried father without parental responsibility, the concept of rights of custody may include more than strictly legal rights and where immediately before the removal or retention of the child that unmarried father was exercising parental functions over a substantial period of time as the only or main carer for the child that unmarried father may have rights of custody. An unmarried father can ask the Central Authority or that unmarried father\u2019s legal representative for advice on this. It is important to remember that it will be for the State which is being asked to return the child to decide if the father\u2019s circumstances meet that State\u2019s requirements for the establishment of rights of custody. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.14 Sometimes, court orders impose restrictions on the removal of children from the country in which they are living. These can be orders under the Children Act (as amended and revised) (\u201csection 10\u201d orders) or orders under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court (sometimes called \u201cinjunctions\u201d). Any removal of a child in breach of an order imposing such a restriction would be wrongful under the 1980 Hague Convention. 2.15 The fact that court proceedings are in progress about a child, does not of itself give rise to a prohibition on the removal of the child by a parent with sole parental responsibility unless: (a)  the proceedings are Wardship proceedings in the Cayman Islands (in which case removal would breach the rights of custody attributed to the Grand Court and fathers with no custody rights could rely on that breach); or (b)  the court is actually considering the custody of the child, because then the court itself would have rights of custody. Defending Abduction Proceedings 2.16 If you are served with an application - whether it is under the 1980 Hague or the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court - you must not delay. You must obey any directions given in any order with which you have been served, and you should seek legal advice at the earliest possible opportunity, although neither you nor the child concerned will automatically be entitled to legal aid. 2.17 It is particularly important that you tell the court where the child is, because the child will not be permitted to live anywhere else without the permission of the court, or to leave the Cayman Islands, until the proceedings are finished. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2.18 It is also particularly important that you present to the court any defence to the application which you or the child might want to make at the earliest possible opportunity, although the orders with which you will have been served are likely to tell you the time by which you will have to do this. 2.19 If the child concerned objects to any order sought in relation to them, and if the child is of an age and understanding at which the court will take account of their views, the court is likely to direct that the child is seen by an officer of the Department of Children and Family Services. You should cooperate in this process. Children are not usually made parties to abduction cases, but in certain exceptional circumstances the court can make them parties so that they have their own separate legal representation. These are all matters about which you should seek legal advice. PART 3 3. Non-Convention Cases 3.1  Applications for the return of children wrongfully removed or retained away from States which are not parties to the 1980 Hague Convention or in respect of children to whom that Convention does not apply, can be made to the Grand Court under its inherent jurisdiction with respect to children. Such proceedings are referred to as \u201cnon-Convention\u201d cases. In proceedings under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court with respect to children, the child\u2019s welfare is the court\u2019s paramount consideration. The extent of the court\u2019s enquiry into the child\u2019s welfare will depend on the circumstances of the case; in some cases the child\u2019s welfare will be best served by a summary hearing and, if necessary, a prompt return to the State from which the child has been removed or retained. In other cases a more detailed enquiry may be necessary (see: Re J (Child Returned Abroad: Convention Rights) [2005] UKHL 40; [2005] 2 FLR 802). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.2  Every application for the return of a child under the inherent jurisdiction must be made in the Registry of the Family Division and heard in the Grand Court. 3.3 The Form and Content of the Application An application for the return of a child under the inherent jurisdiction must be made in Form C54 (attached) and must include the information in paragraph 2.9 above. 3.4 You must file a statement in support of your application, which must exhibit all the relevant documents. The statement must contain and be verified by a statement of truth in the following terms: \u201cI make this statement knowing that it will be placed before the court, and confirm that to the best of my knowledge and belief its contents are true.\u201d PART 4 4. General Provisions 4.1  When a child has been abducted and a judge considers that publicity may help in tracing the child, the judge may adjourn the case for a short period to enable representatives of the Press to give the case the widest possible publicity. DATED this 30th day of May 2014 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 (as amended and revised) Applications for Sealing Orders and for inspection of Court Files in Civil Proceedings Grand Court Rules Order 63 r 3 The current provisions of Order 63 provide for a Register of Judgments and a Register of Writs and Other Originating Process which are open for inspection by the public (O. 63 rules 7 and 8). The balance of a Court file is open to inspection only by the parties: O. 63 r. 3(3); although a non-party may apply for inspection pursuant to O. 63 r. 3(5) (see below). A judge of the Court may order that all or part of a Court file may be sealed and therefore not open to inspection by anyone without leave of the Court: O. 63 r. 3(4). Such leave is granted upon application by any person who is not a party: O. 63 r. 3(5). Order 63 has no application to matrimonial, probate, winding up or bankruptcy proceedings, all of which are governed by their own rules. In furtherance of the rules, the following practice shall apply: An application under O. 63 r. 3(4) to seal all or part of a Court file may be made to the Court or by letter to the Clerk of the Court and may be determined by a Judge administratively. An application to the Clerk of Court will be referred to a Judge with or without recommendation by the Clerk of Court. The application should contain: 1.  the identity of the applicant; 2.  a concise statement of the reason for the request; 7 To be read with Practice Direction on Publication of Chambers Proceedings; 1997 CILR Note I. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 (as amended and revised) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.  a description of the portion of the Court file to be sealed, which should be no broader than is necessary to protect the privacy interest in question; and 4.  a statement of the duration for which the order is required, which should be no longer than is necessary to protect the privacy interest in question. A sealing order under O. 63 r. 3(4) may be made by a Judge of the Court on that Judge\u2019s own motion if that Judge is satisfied that such an order is necessary in the interests of justice. Where a file has been ordered to be closed, the Clerk of Court shall ensure that the file, both in its documented version and electronic version, is appropriately marked as sealed and access is restricted. The Judicial Enforcement Management System (JEMS) will be programmed to ensure that the sealed electronic files are not accessible except to certain levels of staff without leave of the court; such access to be granted after the Clerk of Court has obtained leave from a Judge. Where a sealing order has been made by a Judge, the successful applicant must provide: 1.  A cover letter addressed to the Clerk of Court advising that such an order has been made; 2.  Sufficient copies of the documents to be sealed; and Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.  A fully endorsed cover sheet for an envelope of a type to be provided by the Registry, setting out the file number, names of the parties, the date and duration of the sealing order, and listing the contents of the envelope. The Civil Registry will contact counsel to fix a date and time for the file (or documents) to be sealed in the presence of counsel or that counsel\u2019s representative. The envelope will be date stamped and endorsed with the names of the persons present. Application for inspection of Court Files An application under O. 63 r. 3(5) for leave to inspect a Court file may be made by letter to the Clerk of the Court and may be determined administratively by the Clerk of Court unless the Clerk is of the view that the matter should be referred to a Judge for determination. The application should contain: 1)  The identity of the person seeking leave to inspect and, where that person is an attorney or agent, the identity of that person\u2019s principal. Where the person applying is an agent, written authority of the principal must be furnished. 2)  A concise statement of the reason for the request; and 3)  A description of the portion of the Court file that the applicant wishes to inspect. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 (as amended and revised) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Application for inspection of a sealed file13 1.  An application under O. 63 r. 3(5) for leave to inspect a file which has been sealed by order of the court must be made in writing to the Clerk of Court and notified to the party or parties who obtained closure of the file. 2.  Any objection to inspection and reasons therefor shall be submitted in writing to the Clerk of the Court by no later than 3:00 pm on the fifth day following receipt of notice of the application, for consideration by the Judge who made the sealing order (or, in that Judge\u2019s absence, another Judge). 3.  The application and any objection shall immediately be submitted by the Clerk of Court for consideration by the judge. All orders made under O. 63 rules 3(4) and (5) shall be endorsed on the cover of the file. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice February 20 2015 (Amended on the 13th July 2015) 1 This direction was added upon the advice of the Court of Appeal given in Civil Appeal No. 23 of 2014, Cause FSD 96 of 2014 (AJJ), Sasken Communications Technologies Limited and Spreadrum Communications Inc., transcript of written judgment delivered 10th May 2015. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015 Applications for inspection of Criminal Court Files Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code Where a person applies for inspection of a Criminal Court File pursuant to section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) as a \u2018person affected\u2019, that person shall explain and provide proof of the basis upon which that person applies as a person affected. The Clerk of Court, if satisfied that the person is applying as a person affected, may provide the document or record requested in keeping with section 193, provided that the document or record is not of a class in respect of which inspection has been otherwise curtailed by order of the Court or by this Practice Direction. Applications for inspection other than under section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code An application for leave to inspect a Criminal Court file may be made by letter to the Clerk of the Court and may be determined administratively by the Clerk of Court unless the Clerk is of the view that the matter should be referred to a Judge for determination. The application should contain: 1.  The identity of the person seeking leave to inspect and, where that person is an attorney or agent, the identity of that person\u2019s principal. Where the person applying is an agent, written authority of the principal must be furnished. Where the person applying is a guardian, parent or person in loco parentis, proof of the relationship must be furnished. 2.  A concise statement of the reason for the request; and 3.  A description of the portion of the Court file that the applicant wishes to inspect. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 The following documents will not be open to inspection unless ordered by a Judge: 1.  Public Interest Immunity material, so deemed by order of the court. 2.  Witness Statements involving the evidence of witnesses in sensitive cases.14 3.  A document which was sealed by the Court during the trial or other stage of the criminal proceedings. 4.  Letters or other communication presented to the Judge for consideration but not adduced into evidence, 5.  Any other document that is not in the public domain (for example: Psychiatric or Probation reports) 6.  Files relating to sexual offence cases. Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice February 20 2015 1 For the purpose of this Practice Direction, sensitive cases are defined as cases involving firearms offences, sexual offences, or cases involving witnesses in protection or in respect of whom anonymity orders have been made. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 3 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 3 OF 2015 (GCR O. 96, r. 3(5)) LIST OF APPROVED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS This is the list of independent real estate appraisers currently approved by the Grand Court Rules Committee (the \\\"Rules Committee\\\") pursuant to GCR Order 96, rule 3(5). In compiling this list the Rules Committee has adopted the criteria for inclusion in the Cayman Islands Government Valuation Panel compiled by the Valuations and Estates Office of the Cayman Islands Government. The Valuations and Estates Office has certified that the firms listed below meet the minimum professional qualification and experience criteria for appointment to the Cayman Islands Government Valuation Panel and are hereby approved by the Rules Committee pursuant to GCR Order 96, rule 3(5): \uf0b7 BCQS International \uf0b7 Blue Point Consultants Ltd. \uf0b7 Bould Consulting Ltd. \uf0b7 Charterland Ltd. \uf0b7 DDL Studio \uf0b7 Integra Realty Resources \u2013 Caribbean \uf0b7 JEC Property Consultants Ltd. In each case the appraisal is to be completed or countersigned by an appraiser who has attained the Chartered Valuation Surveyor professional designation from the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. Issued by the Grand Court Rules Committee on the 9th day of July 2015. The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice The Hon. Samuel Bulgin, Q.C., Attorney General Colin D. McKie, Q.C., Legal Practitioner Hector Robinson, Legal Practitioner GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 (GCR O. 1, r. 12) WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS (GCR O. 38 AND O. 41) TAKING EVIDENCE FROM WITNESSES, AFFIANTS AND DEPONENTS WHO DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH 1.  If a witness or affiant or deponent (a \\\"Witness\\\") is not capable of reading or speaking English then a witness statement or affidavit or deposition (a \\\"Statement\\\") from that person must be prepared in that person\u2019s native language before being translated into English. Where the Statement is in a foreign language \u2013 (1)  the party wishing to rely on it must \u2013 (a) have it translated into English; and (b) file the foreign language Statement at the Court and serve it on the other parties; and (2)  the translator must swear an affidavit certifying that the exhibited translation is a faithful and accurate translation into English. 2.  There must be clarity about the process by which a Statement in a foreign language has been created. In all cases, the Statement should contain an explanation of the process by which it has been taken: for example, face-to-face, over the telephone, by Skype\/video-link, or based on a document written in the Witness' native language. If an attorney has been instructed by the party, that attorney should be fully involved in the process described above and should not defer or delegate it to that attorney\u2019s client. 3.  If an attorney is presented with a Statement in English from a witness whom the attorney is not reasonably satisfied is able to read, speak and testify in English, the attorney should question its provenance and not simply seek to adduce the document as a proof of evidence. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4.  The Witness should be spoken to wherever possible, using an interpreter, and a draft Statement should be prepared in the native language for the Witness to read and sign and for the interpreter to read. If the attorney is fluent in the foreign language then it is permissible for that attorney to act in the role of the interpreter. However, this must be made clear either within the body of the Statement or in a separate affidavit from the attorney (in that attorney\u2019s role as interpreter). 5.  A litigant in person should where possible use an interpreter when preparing a Statement. 6.  If the Witness is not able to read or write in their own native language, the interpreter must carefully read the Statement to the Witness in that Witness\u2019s own native language and set out the fact that the interpreter has done so in the translator's jurat or affidavit, using the words provided in Annex 1 or 2. 7.  Once the witness has completed that witness\u2019s Statement in that witness\u2019s native language and signed it, the Statement should be translated by a translator who must then either: sign a jurat confirming that the translation is a faithful and accurate translation of the Statement; or provide a short affidavit to the same effect. 8.  If a Witness is to testify either in person or by video-link, a copy of the original Statement in that Witness\u2019s native language and the English translation thereof must be provided to the Witness well in advance of the hearing. 9.  If a deposition or other Statement has been obtained and prepared abroad in compliance with the relevant country's laws, a translation of that deposition or other Statement must be filed at Court and served on the other parties together with the original document. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 10.  If a party files and serves a Statement in English (not being a translation into English) then the Court will be entitled to presume that this is a representation from that party and that party\u2019s attorney to the Court and to the other parties that the Witness is fluent in English and that the Witness is willing and able to testify in English. In the event that the Court is subsequently satisfied that the Witness is not willing or able to testify in English, the Court will make such case-management orders as it sees fit, including, without limitation: (1)  Whether or not the party is to be permitted to rely on the Statement; (2)  Whether or not the party is to be permitted to adduce a new Statement from the Witness in a foreign language in compliance with the terms of this Practice Direction; (3)  Whether or not to adjourn any hearing and, if so, whether a court translator will be required to attend the adjourned hearing; (4)  Whether or not the party should bear the costs thrown away and, if so, whether those costs should be on the standard basis or indemnity basis; and (5)  Whether or not a wasted costs order should be made against the party's attorney. 11. This Practice Direction applies to all Divisions of the Grand Court except the Criminal Division. Practice Direction No 8 of 2014 (Taking evidence from non-English speakers in the Family Division of the Grand Court) is hereby revoked. Dated this 9th day of July 2015 The Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Annex 1 Certificate to be used where an affiant is unable to read or sign an affidavit written in that affiant\u2019s native language. Sworn at \u2026 [place] this \u2026 day of \u2026 20.. Before me, [and either] I having first read over the contents of this affidavit to the affiant [if there are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect of the exhibits referred to in it], who appeared to understand it and approved its content as true and accurate, and signed\/made* his\/her* mark on the affidavit in my presence. [Name and signature of notary or other person authorised to administer oath where affidavit sworn] [or] the witness to the mark of the affiant having been first sworn that the witness had read over the contents of this affidavit to the affiant [if there are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect of the exhibits referred to in it], who appeared to understand it and approved its content as true and accurate, and that the witness saw the affiant sign\/make* his\/her* mark on the affidavit. [Name and signature of witness.] [Name and signature of notary or other person authorised to administer oath where affidavit sworn] * delete as appropriate GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Annex 2 Certificate to be used where a witness is unable to read or sign a witness statement written in that witness\u2019s native language. I certify that I [name and address of authorised person] have read over the contents of this witness statement and the statement of truth to the witness [if there are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect of the exhibits referred to in it] who (a) appeared to understand the witness statement and approved its content as true and accurate and (b) appeared to understand the statement of truth and the consequences of making a false witness statement, and signed\/made* his\/her mark* in my presence. [Signature of witness.] Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 CAYMAN ISLANDS SUMMARY COURT - CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT 1. Purpose 1.1 The purpose of this Practice Direction is to establish a procedure for case management in criminal proceedings in the Summary Court to reduce delays and improve efficiency. 2. Context 2.1 In this Practice Direction: 2.1.1 \u201cCourt\u201d means the Summary Court. 3. The Overriding Objective 3.1  The overriding objective of this Practice Direction is that criminal cases be dealt with justly and expeditiously. 3.2  Dealing with a case in furtherance of the overriding objective includes \u2013 (i)  Acquitting the innocent and convicting the guilty; (ii)  Dealing with the Prosecution and the Defence fairly; (iii) Recognising the fundamental rights and freedoms protected by the Constitution of the Cayman Islands. (iv)  Respecting the interests of witnesses, victims and keeping them informed of the progress of the case; (v)  Dealing with the case efficiently and expeditiously; (vi)  Dealing with cases in ways that take into account \u2013 (a)  The gravity of the offence alleged; (b)  The complexity of what is in issue; (c)  The severity of the consequences for the defendant and others affected; and (d)  The needs of other cases. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. The duty of the parties in a criminal case 4.1  Each of the parties, in the conduct of each case, must: (i)  Prepare and conduct the case in accordance with the overriding objective; (ii)  Comply with Practice Directions and directions made by the Court including times set within which actions must be taken either under this Practice Direction or by rules of the court; and (iii) At once inform the Court and all parties of any significant failure (whether or not that participant is responsible for that failure) to take any procedural step required by this Practice Direction or any direction of the Court; 4.2.1 A failure is significant if it might hinder the Court in furthering the overriding objective. 4.2.2 Anyone involved in any way with a criminal case is a participant in its conduct for the purposes of this Practice Direction. 5. The application by the Court of the overriding objective 5.1 The Court must further the overriding objective in particular when exercising any power given to it by legislation, applying any Practice Direction, or interpreting any Practice Direction. 6. The duty of the Court 6.1  The Court must further the overriding objective by actively managing the case. Active case management includes: (i)  The early identification of the real issues; (ii)  The early identification of the needs of the witnesses; (iii) Achieving certainty as to what must be done, by whom, and when, in particular by the early setting of a timetable for the progress of the case; (iv) Monitoring the progress of the case and compliance with directions; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (v)  Ensuring that evidence, whether disputed or not, is presented in the shortest and clearest way; (vi) Discouraging delay, dealing with as many aspects of the case as possible on the same occasion, and avoiding unnecessary hearings; (vii) Encouraging the participants to co-operate in the progression of the case; and (viii) Making use of technology as appropriate and available. 6.2 The Court must actively manage the case by giving any direction appropriate to the needs of that case as early as possible. 7. The duty of the parties 7.1 Each party must actively assist the Court in fulfilling its duty under paragraph 6.1, with or without a direction - and apply for a direction if needed to further the overriding objective. 8. The Court\u2019s case management powers 8.1  In fulfilling its duty under paragraph 6, the Court may give any direction and take any step to actively manage a case unless that direction or step would be inconsistent with legislation, or this Practice Direction. 8.2  In particular the Court may: (i)  Direct that preliminary issues, such as admissibility of evidence, are determined at a hearing before the trial; (ii)  Nominate a Magistrate to manage a case; (iii)  Give a direction on its own initiative or on application by a party; (iv)  Ask or allow a party to propose a direction; (v) For the purpose of giving directions, the Court will receive applications and representations by letter, by telephone or by any other means of electronic communication, and conduct a hearing by such means; 8.3  Give a direction: (i)  At a hearing, in public or in private, or GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (ii) Without a hearing (iii) Fix, postpone, bring forward, extend, cancel or adjourn a hearing; 8.4  Shorten or extend (even after it has expired) a time limit fixed by a direction; 8.5 Require that issues in the case should be: (i)  Identified in writing, (ii) Determined separately, and decide in what order they will be determined; and (iii) Specify the consequences of failing to comply with a direction. 8.6  Any power to give a direction under this Practice Direction includes a power to vary or revoke that direction. 8.7  If a party fails to comply with a rule or direction, the Court may: (i)  Fix, postpone, bring forward, extend, cancel or adjourn a hearing; (ii)  Exercise its powers to make a costs order; and\/or (iii) Impose such other sanction as may be appropriate. 9. Case preparation and progression 9.1  At every hearing, if a case cannot be concluded there and then, the Court must give directions so that it can be concluded at the next hearing or as soon as possible after that. 9.2  At every hearing the Court must, where relevant: (i)  Take the defendant's plea (unless already done) or, if no plea can be taken, find out whether the defendant is likely to plead guilty or not guilty; (ii)  Set, follow or revise a timetable for the progress of the case, which may include a timetable for any hearing including the trial; (iii)  Where a direction has not been complied with, find out why, identify who was responsible, and take appropriate action. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 9.3  In order to prepare for the trial, the Court must take every reasonable step, to encourage and to facilitate the attendance of witnesses when they are needed; and to facilitate the participation of any person, including the defendant. 10. Conduct of a trial and ancillary proceedings 10.1 In order to manage a trial and any ancillary proceedings, such as confiscation, the Court: 10.1.1 Must establish, with the active assistance of the parties, what are the disputed issues; 10.1.2 Must consider setting a timetable: (i)  That takes account of those issues and of any timetable proposed by a party; and (ii)  May limit the duration of any stage of the hearing; 10.1.3 May require a party to identify: (i)  Which witnesses that party wants to give evidence in person; (ii)  The order in which that party wants those witnesses to give their evidence; (iii) Whether that party requires an order compelling attendance of a witness; (iv) What arrangements are desirable to facilitate the giving of evidence by a witness; (v)  What arrangements are desirable to facilitate the participation of any other person, including the defendant; (vi)  What written evidence that party intends to introduce; (vii) What other material, if any, that person intends to make available to the Court in the presentation of the case; and (viii) Whether that party intends to raise any point of law that could affect the conduct of the trial or ancillary application; and 10.1.4 May limit: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (i)  The examination, cross-examination or re-examination of a witness; and (ii) The duration of any stage of the hearing. 10.1.5. The Case Management Form issued with this Practice Direction shall be completed (in the case of a represented defendant) by the Defence and Prosecution counsel and in the case of an unrepresented defendant by the presiding Magistrate with the assistance of the Prosecution Counsel. 11. TIME LIMITS Note: The directions in this Part set down the maximum time-limits within which it is desirable that every case should be disposed of. Every effort must still be made to dispose of cases as soon as reasonably practicable, which in some cases will result in a substantially quicker disposal. The directions in this part do not apply to proceedings which are before the Drug Treatment Court or other diversionary programmes. Timeframe for the completion of proceedings: summary matters 11.1 (i)  Every matter to be tried before the Summary Court should aim to be concluded within a period not exceeding 12 months from the date of the First Hearing. (ii)  In the event of conviction, the defendant should be sentenced by the Court before which the defendant was convicted within a period not exceeding 56 days from the date of conviction, save only in the case of exceptional circumstances. Custody Cases 11.2 In the event that a defendant is remanded to custody, that defendant\u2019s trial shall be concluded: (i)  In the case of a matter triable in the Summary Court, within a period not exceeding 9 months, unless there are exceptional circumstances, from the date of the first hearing. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 12. ADJOURNMENTS Criteria for Grant of Adjournment 12.1 Adjournments shall be granted only if the Court is satisfied that: (i)  There is good cause for an adjournment; and (ii)  An adjournment is necessary in meeting the interests of justice. 12.2 (i)  Where there have been two or more adjournments for the same reason(s), the Court shall only grant a further adjournment if exceptional circumstances are shown. (ii)  Case involving defendants in custody and cases in which the trial has already been adjourned must not be adjourned unless exceptional circumstances can be shown to the satisfaction of the Court. (iii) Once a trial has been commenced, an adjournment shall only be granted where the grounds for the application could not reasonably have been known at the time the trial started or where there are exceptional reasons for justifying the delay. 12.3 Applications for an adjournment should be rigorously scrutinised, in particular, the following factors to be taken into consideration: (i)  Summary justice should be speedy justice; (ii)  The more serious the charge, the more the public interest demands that a trial take place; (iv)  The age of the complainant and any other significant witnesses; (v)  Whether or not the refusal of an adjournment would compromise the defendant\u2019s ability to fully present that defendant\u2019s defence; and (vi) The history of adjournments, at whose request any previous adjournments have been made and the reasons provided. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Note: 1.  The overriding objective of this Practice Direction is the just and expeditious disposal of cases. This cannot be achieved by the Court readily granting adjournments without good cause being shown. Particular care is required in respect of applications that are made once a trial has been commenced and the general presumption in such cases should always be against an adjournment being granted. 2. This Part applies equally to cases in which a defendant\u2019s attorney has failed to attend. An attorney is obliged to notify the Court immediately should they become aware of a conflicting fixture. A defendant is not entitled to repeated adjournments to secure the right to legal representation: R v Robinson (1985) 32 WIR 330, PC. The overriding consideration must be the requirements of justice, for both the Prosecution and the defence; R v De Oliveira [1997] Crim L.R. 600. 13. PROCEDURAL STAGES and TIMETABLE: SUMMARY COURT The First Hearing 13.1 (i) The First Hearing in each case shall be conducted by a Magistrate. (ii)  At the First Hearing the following should occur, where practicable and without hampering the disposal of the weekly Mentions List: (a)  verification of the defendant\u2019s identity, current address and contact details; (b)  if the defendant is, or intends to be represented, details of representation shall be provided; (c)  if the defendant is not represented any intention or request on the part of the defendant that that defendant will be legally represented shall be recorded; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (d)  an unrepresented defendant should be given an explanation of that defendant\u2019s rights, including, where appropriate, the right to: (i)  bail; (ii)  silence, save in respect of confirmation of that defendant\u2019s name and contact details; (iii) a trial; (iv) an interpreter; and (e)  consideration of bail for unrepresented defendants in custody and any application for represented defendants, shall be taken (or adjourned to next earliest date); (iii) oral notification shall be given to the defendant of the date for the next hearing. Second Hearings 13.2 (i)  For summary only matters, every defendant shall be required to enter a plea at the second hearing and a trial date shall be set if a not guilty plea is entered. (ii)  For either way matters, the defendant shall be required to enter a plea at the second hearing if the court determines that it is to be tried summarily. (iii) For indictable matters not yet committed for trial in the Grand Court, the defendant shall be asked whether or not the defendant wishes to indicate a plea at the start of every hearing in the Summary Court. Venue Hearing 13.3 (i)  A Venue Hearing shall only take place in either way cases. (ii)  Venue Hearings are to be conducted by a Magistrate and, wherever possible, this should be done at the same time as the First Hearing. (iii) The purpose of the Venue Hearing is to determine whether the matter should be tried or sentenced, as appropriate taking into GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 account any plea indication, in the Summary Court or the Grand Court. Accepting Guilty pleas 13.4 (i)  Where a defendant is represented, before accepting a plea of guilty to any or all of the charges, the Magistrates must satisfy themselves (either by questioning the defendant personally or by calling upon counsel to confirm the position or to lead the questioning), that the defendant acknowledges guilt; that the plea is entered voluntarily and that it is made with an appropriate understanding of the consequences. (ii) Where a defendant is unrepresented, before accepting a plea of guilty to any or all of the charges, the Magistrates must satisfy themselves by enquiring of the defendant that the defendant acknowledges guilt and enters the plea voluntarily with an appropriate understanding of the consequences. (iii)  A Magistrate may refuse to accept any plea of guilty if the Magistrate is not satisfied that any of the conditions set out in subRule (i) above are not met and\/or that it is not in the interests of justice to do so. (iv)  If a plea of guilty is not accepted, the fact of the guilty plea having been given shall not be admissible as evidence of that person\u2019s guilt in any subsequent trial in respect of that alleged offence. 13.5 If the defendant is prepared to plead guilty to alternative offences from the one(s) with which the defendant has been charged, the defendant shall inform the Prosecution and the court upon arraignment. 13.6Where the prosecutor requires an adjournment to consult with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions before accepting a plea to an alternative offence, the Court shall list the case for a hearing to take place in no later than 28 days. Notes: When accepting a guilty plea, the court must enquire whether that plea was offered by the defendant at an earlier stage in the proceedings. If Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 so, the Prosecution must explain why it was not reasonable for that offer to have been accepted before. Preliminary Inquiries 13.7 (i) The defence shall notify the Prosecution if the Preliminary Inquiry is to be contested at least 7 days before it is due to be heard; 14. Effective Date 14.1 This Practice Direction shall come into effect on the 1st day of September 2015. Dated this 29th day of July 2015 The Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6. Signatures First Hearing: Date: Magistrate Case Management Hearing: Date: Magistrate Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 (GCR O.1, R.12) FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION - PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS 1. Appointment of Registrar of the FSD 1.1 With effect from February 2016, Mrs. Shiona Allenger, the Registrar of the FSD (appointed pursuant to Rule 2(1) of the Grand Court (Amendment)  Rules 2009) on a full time basis. 1.2 All communications with the Registrar should be \u2014 (a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor, Kirk House; or (b) by e-mail addressed to shiona.allenger@judicial.ky; or (c) by telephone  244 3808. 2. Assignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD 2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting in conjunction  with  the Chief Justice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined in GCR O.72, r.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the proceeding is commenced. 2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner\/plaintiff's attorney to provide the Registrar with any and all information which appears to that attorney to be relevant in determining which judge should be assigned to the matter. For example \u2014 (a) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be appropriate for two or more related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process; or (b) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be inappropriate for a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 reason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process. 2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will \u2014 (a) notify the parties' attorneys; and (b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge . 2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned judge on the next business day following the day on which the originating process is filed at the FSD Registry. 2.5 The Registrar will ensure that the docket of the financial services proceedings assigned to each Judge of the FSD is kept up to date and circulated weekly to the Chief Justice. 2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.5, r. 1(7) requires that the initials of the assigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part of the cause number. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must be included as part of the cause number as it appears in all pleadings, affidavits and orders. 3. Procedure for listing hearings 3.1 The Registrar is responsible, pursuant to GCR O.  72, r.5, for listing the hearing of all matters pending in the FSD. 3.2 With effect from 15th February 2016, all communications relating to the listing of the hearing of any FSD matter shall be addressed to the Registrar who will consult with the Grand Court Listing Officer. 3.3 For the purpose of this Practice Direction the expression \\\"hearing\\\" shall include summonses for directions, case management conferences (\\\"CMCs\\\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference calls), interlocutory applications and trials. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has been assigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to review the Court file. 3.5 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to the FSD. 3.6 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the availability of judges, the Registrar of the FSD and Listing Officer are not authorised to fix any hearing date without the prior approval of the assigned judge.  If  the assigned judge is not already familiar with the issues or cannot readily ascertain the issues relevant to the proposed hearing by reviewing the Court  file,  the parties may be required to produce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72, r.4(3). 3.7 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned judge in consultation with the Registrar and Listing Officer, will normally fix the hearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions or at a CMC in which all parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel) will be required to participate. 3.8 The Registrar will publish a monthly list (on the 1st of each month) of hearings scheduled in the FSD for the ensuing month. 4. Listing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions 4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for reducing the share capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies Act (as amended and revised)) the petitioner's attorney is required (pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6) to issue a summons for directions at the same time as presenting the petition. 4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the proposed order for directions including the timetable for the company meeting(s) and court hearing(s), together with a covering letter which explains whether and, if so, why the matter is particularly time sensitive. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the assigned Judge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be dispensed with under s.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional case where settlement of a list of creditors is required under s.15(2), and the materials filed do not disclose any other reason for the assigned judge to require additional evidence or submissions, then that Judge may make an order for directions without the need for a hearing. In all other cases that Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing in chambers. 5. Listing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders under s.124. 5.1 Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of the Companies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made without the need for any  hearing  (pursuant to CWR O.15 , r.5(1).) 5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which further evidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may convene a CMC or (in consultation with the Registrar) direct the Listing Officer to fix a date for hearing the petition in open court. 6. Applications for an order that a company be restored to the Register 6.1 With effect from Monday 27th September 2010 applications made by a company or one of its members, which are governed by GCR  O.102, r.17, are determined by the Registrar of the FSD rather than the Clerk of the Court and Form Nos. 66 and 67 should be amended accordingly. 6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17(6)(c), that an application ought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the Registrar will - (a) assign the application to a judge of the FSD; (b) fix a hearing date; and (c) give notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.18, will continue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD. 6.4 At the same time as assigning a creditor's application to a judge of the FSD, the Registrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to advertise the petition and give other creditors an opportunity to be heard, the hearing will be fixed on a date not less than 21 days or more that 28 days after the date on which the petition is presented. 7. Applications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred 7.1 An application by an official liquidator or officeholder for a direction, pursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), that payment of court fees be deferred must be made to the assigned judge. 7.2 Such applications should be made by letter signed by the official liquidator or officeholder personally, addressed to the assigned judge and sent to the Registrar. 7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned Judge and that Judge\u2019s decision will be communicated to the applicant and the Registrar by the judge's personal assistant. 7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the official liquidator or officeholder shall have the right to ask the Judge to reconsider that Judge\u2019s decision, for which purpose the applicant may ask the Judge's personal assistant to fix an appointment for that applicant to appear before the Judge in person. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) is to ensure that an officeholder who is required or entitled to make an application to the Court in the performance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will be payable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not be deterred from performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in the position of having to pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s own pocket. 7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an official liquidator has under that liquidator\u2019s control \\\"sufficient money with which to pay the fees immediately\\\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge will have regard to the general rules as to priority contained in CWR Order 20, the effect of which is that court fees rank ahead of an official liquidator's remuneration. 7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under that officeholder\u2019s control, that officeholder\u2019s application letter must state (a) the amount which is immediately available; (b) the amount which is likely to become available to that officeholder within the next 90 days; (c) the purposes for which the officeholder intends to spend such cash over the next 90 days; and (d) whether the officeholder has received any remuneration or holds funds in trust for that purpose. 8. Applications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as \\\"consolidated\\\" for the purposes of assessing court fees 8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff for a direction that two or more separate proceedings governed by the Companies Winding Up Rules or GCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of calculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable pursuant to Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) must be made to the Registrar. 8.2 Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the Registrar at the time of filing the originating process. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the provisions of paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shall apply. 9. Case Management Conferences 9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of O.72, r.4(2), the assigned Judge may convene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit. 9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if foreign lawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the parties or the assigned judge is likely to be off the Island. 9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a telephone conference call, the Registrar will direct one of the parties to set up the call and circulate the dial-in instructions and codes to the judge and all the parties. 9.4 The etiquette for telephonic CMCs requires that all participating attorneys (apart from leading counsel or foreign lawyers who may participate remotely) must be present in the court room or Judge's chambers and be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge will be the last person to join the conference, whereupon the Judge will ask all the participants to identify themselves. Where the CMC will not be determinative of substantive issues, the judge may, in advance to the hearing dispense with the need for the attorney(s) to be present at Court and, in which event, the other provisions of this practice direction will apply accordingly. 9.5 Telephonic CMC's may not be tape recorded without the consent of the Judge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be tape recorded, the Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the judge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not tape recorded, the note taken or approved by the judge will constitute the official record. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the assigned judge during the course of a CMC and, in appropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the principal purpose of fixing the date for the trial or further hearings. 10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD 10 .1Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear summonses for directions and interlocutory applications by means of telephone or video conferences when they are off the Island. 10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes place by telephone or video conference. 11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 15th day of February, 2016. With effect from 15th day of February, 2016 Practice Direction No. 6 of 2015 is hereby revoked. Hon, Anthony Smellie Chief Justice 8th day of February, 2016 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017 Payments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts Act and Grand Court Rules Order 92 (GCR O. 92). Payments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts Act (as amended and revised) and Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) Order 92 (GCR O. 92). 1. Section 69 of the Trusts Act (as amended and revised) prescribes a special jurisdiction and procedure for payments into court by trustees. It is a form of relief afforded to trustees who may, for a variety of recognised reasons, wish to relieve themselves of the responsibility for holding trust funds. Examples are where a trustee is unable to obtain a discharge for the funds (such as where the beneficiary of the trust is a minor or a patient) or where a beneficiary refused to consent to the sale of trust property against the wishes of the majority of beneficiaries. If a trustee is in doubt as to who is entitled to a fund in that trustee\u2019s hands, GCR O.85 is generally available for the purpose of getting the point decided and if so, this course should be followed instead of the funds being lodged in Court under section 69 of the Trusts Act (as amended and revised). 2. For the purposes of section 69, the applicable rule is GCR Order 92 rule 2. Where there are as yet no proceedings before the Court, the applicable rule is sub-rule 2(3), in which case the required affidavit prescribed by sub-rule 2(1) must be filed with the Accountant General of the Court, instead of directly with the Court. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3. In the case of a trust fund which is already the subject of proceedings before  the Court, the applicable procedure is prescribed by sub-rule 2(2) which requires the affidavit prescribed by sub-rule (1) to be filed directly with the Court and a copy served upon the Accountant General of the Court. 4. Monies paid in under sub-rule 2(2) or 2(3) will be held in escrow in a bank account by the Accountant General. 5. Notice of the payment in must be served upon every interested party by the trustee in keeping with rule 3. 6. Any interested party will then be able to apply to the Court for payment out under rule 4. 7. This practice is to be distinguished from that for dealing with payments into Court in relation to actions for debt or damages (see GCR Order 22); or in relation to orders for security for costs (as permitted by GCR Order 23 rule 2); or in relation to interpleader proceedings (GCR Order 17 rule 4(c)). l August 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Registration of Foreign Maintenance Orders or Judgments Sections 14, 22 and 23 of the Maintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"the Law\\\") INTRODUCTION The Maintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"the Law\\\") in sections 14, 22 and 23, provides for the enforcement in the Island s of certain foreign orders and judgments by way of registration. In broad terms, these are the orders or judgments of the courts of England, Ireland and Jamaica and of courts of countries (or of jurisdictions within countries) which are designated by Order made by the Cabinet and referenced within schedules to the Law. To date only the courts of Belize and two Canadian Provinces (the Yukon and Ontario) have been referenced within schedules by Orders made under the Law. The process of registration is meant to be simple and direct, avoiding the need to prove the foreign order or judgment by way of suit. It is nonetheless essential that, as provided by the Law, once registered, the order or judgment is enforceable as if it had been made by a local court. To this end the process requires that the foreign order or judgment is enforced by order of a judge of the Grand Court or (if it emanates from a foreign court which is not a court of superior jurisdiction) by an order of a Magistrate of the Summary Court. This practice direction explains the procedure - adopted from Grand Court Rules Order 71 which prescribes the procedure for the enforcement of foreign judgments under the Foreign Judgments Reciprocal Enforcement Act (as amended and revised) (the \\\"F.J.R.E.L.\\\"). Like under the Law, under the F.J.R.E.L., only the judgments of those foreign countries or territories scheduled by Order of the Cabinet (and in the case of the F.J.R.E.L regarded as providing reciprocity) can be enforced by way of registration. Here too GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 under F.J.R.E.L, at present, only the judgments of a limited number of courts are enforceable by registration - those of the Superior Courts of Australia and its External Territories. Other than under the Law and under the F.J.R.E.L, it remains the position that foreign judgments can be enforced within the Islands only by way of being sued upon at common law. DIRECTIONS: 1. The Clerk of the Court shall be the \\\"Prescribed Officer\\\" for the purposes of section 14, 22 and 23 of the Law. 2. The Prescribed Officer shall maintain a Register of Foreign Maintenance Orders and Judgments (\\\"the Register\\\"). The Register will be a public record. 3. Upon receipt of an order or judgment of a foreign court capable of registration under the Law, the Prescribed Officer shall apply to the Grand Court by ex parte originating summons for the registration of the foreign order or judgment.  Where the foreign order or judgment was made by a court which is not a court of superior jurisdiction, the Prescribed Officer shall apply to the Summary Court. 4. An application for registration must be supported by an affidavit by the Prescribed Officer: (a) exhibiting the order or judgment or certified (or otherwise duly authenticated) copy thereof and where the judgment is not in the English language, a translation thereof in the English language certified by a notary public or authenticated by affidavit; (b) stating the name and the usual or last known place of abode or business of the judgment creditor and judgment debtor Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 respectively, so far as known to the prescribed officer or as disclosed in the foreign order or judgment; (c) stating to the best of the information or belief of the Prescribed Officer: (i) that the foreign order or judgment is a certified copy thereof of the  relevant foreign court duly transmitted to the Governor in keeping with section 14 of the Law. (ii) As the case may require, either that at the date of the application the foreign order or judgment has not been satisfied, or that the amount in respect of which it was made remains unsatisfied. 5. (a) An order of the Grand Court giving leave to register the foreign order or judgment shall be drawn up by the Prescribed Officer on behalf of the judgment creditor and presented to the Judge or (in the case of a foreign order or judgment made by a court which is not a court of superior jurisdiction) to a Magistrate of the Summary Court, for grant of registration. (b) An Order of the Grand or Summary Court giving leave to register shall state the period of time for compliance with the terms of the foreign order or judgment, and that failing which, the Prescribed Officer will have leave automatically to take steps for enforcement as if the foreign order or judgment had been originally made by the Grand Court or Summary Court, respectively. (c) Upon grant of registration of the foreign order or judgment it shall be entered in the Register and served upon the judgment debtor by notice of its registration; (d) Notice of registration of a foreign order or judgment (with the order or judgment of the foreign court attached) must be served upon the judgment debtor by delivering it to the judgement debtor personally at that judgment debtor\u2019s usual or last known place of GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 abode  or business as identified in keeping with paragraph 4(b) above. 6. Execution shall not issue for a foreign order or judgment registered under the Law until after the period of time for compliance with the terms of the foreign order or judgment has expired. 7. An application for execution shall be supported by an affidavit of service of the notice of registration of the foreign order or judgment and the order granting leave for its registration. l August 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Court Stenographer Services Introduction From time to time questions have arisen about the responsibility of the stenographers to cover civil proceedings and to provide transcripts in criminal cases. Recently, the question also arose whether they are obliged to provide copies of any back up audio recordings (\\\"BUARs\\\") that they may make for the purpose of assisting them in producing the transcripts of proceedings in criminal cases. The stenographers are engaged to provide verbatim records of proceedings in Grand Court criminal cases. While section 53(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) (\\\"the CPC\\\") contemplates that this would include criminal proceedings before the Summary Courts, resources have only ever allowed for this to be done in the Grand Court. The notes kept by the Chief Magistrate and Magistrates will continue to comprise the official record of proceedings in the Summary Courts. Consideration is being given to the introduction of a digital audio recording system for the recording of proceedings in the Summary Courts and further practice directions will be issued when that system is in place. Section 53(1) of the CPC provides generally that, in the absence of other specific statutory provision, the Judge may give directions as to the manner in which evidence is recorded in any proceedings before any criminal court. These directions proceed on the basis of that provision (and of course on the basis of the authority vested by section 95(7) of the Constitution) and are intended to explain and clarify the established practice. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1. Criminal Cases: Official Transcripts The transcript of criminal proceedings recorded by the stenographers and certified as correct by certificates given by the stenographers in keeping with the terms of section 53 (4) of the CPC, will be the official transcripts of the proceedings. In the production and certification of the final transcripts, the stenographers will be at liberty to confirm any details of the evidence or arguments with the defence or prosecution attorneys and, especially as to the details of the judge's summation to the jury, with the trial judge. Experience has shown that even the BUARs kept by the stenographers will sometimes fail to record clearly nuances of pronunciation. For such reasons, attorneys are encouraged to make available to the stenographers copies of written submissions and the judges, copies of written summations. Daily transcripts In an ideal world, daily transcripts would be provided on the ongoing basis during trials. This is not however, a tenable proposition because nearly as much time may be required out of court for tidying up the transcripts for certification before release, as needed for recording them in court. Transcripts will therefore not be available on the daily basis during criminal trials. It has however been agreed with the stenographers and is now established practice, that daily transcripts in draft (or so much of them as needed) will be provided to the judges if required for the purposes of directing the trials. As these will be in draft, the obvious reason why the same service may not be extended to the attorneys (or defendants in person), is the likelihood that they would seek to rely upon the draft transcripts as a conclusive record of whatever aspect of the proceedings they seek to emphasise, even while they have not yet been certified. More specifically, attorneys would seek to rely upon the draft transcript for the purposes of examining or cross-examining the present or Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 upcoming witnesses, an exercise that would be permissible only if the transcript is certified. Attorneys will nonetheless still be able to call upon the stenographers, as the need may arise from time to time during a trial, to confirm any aspect of the evidence from their notes. 2. Transcripts for criminal appeal cases By direction of the Court of Appeal,15 in an appeal against any conviction by the Grand Court, the appellant shall be entitled to receive free of charge a transcript of any stenographer's note made at the trial, at the arraignment of the plea entered to the indictment and the judge's summing up to the jury. In the case of an appeal against any sentence by the Grand Court, the appellant shall also be entitled to receive free of charge a transcript of any stenographer's note of the sentencing proceedings. Court of Appeal Rule 33A goes on to direct that further aspects of the transcripts of criminal trials will be provided to parties only where truly necessary for the preparation and presentation of appeals. As the need for these further transcripts should arise well in advance of the Court of Appeal hearing, an application must be made in writing to a judge of the Grand Court explaining the need for them in keeping also with Rule 33A. In making such an application, the applicant shall state precisely which further parts of the trial transcript are sought, giving brief reasons why each part of the transcript sought is required. It is therefore clear that an objective of the rule, is to ensure that applicants do not require more of the transcripts than will reasonably suffice for the filing and presentation of appeals. 3. Recording and transcribing of ex tempore judgments in the Court of Appeal and the Grand Court The stenographers have been extremely helpful in the Court of Appeal and the Grand Court by recording and transcribing ex tempore 8 See Court of Appeal Rule 33A, as introduced by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules 2009. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 judgments in both criminal and civil appeals and cases. In Grand Court criminal cases the stenographers will provide directly to the judge the transcript they have prepared of any ex tempore judgment or ruling. The judge will then make any amendments, if necessary, and return the transcript directly back to the stenographer. If it is required for purposes of an appeal, that transcript will be included in the appeal bundle. (In the case of distribution to other judges and\/or for the Law Reports, the stenographer will put that transcript in Word and PDF formats and email it to the officer responsible for distribution of judgments). In the Court of Appeal the transcription of ex tempore judgments has usually been provided for criminal cases although exceptionally, the Court may require this service for a civil case. In the Grand Court where the stenographers cover all criminal proceedings, the transcription of ex tempore judgments will for civil cases, be provided if exceptionally required by a judge. This practice will continue subject to the directions below which will apply more generally to the practice in civil cases. 4. Stenographers notes and transcripts for civil cases. The Judicial Administration remains unable to provide stenographer services for civil cases generally although this may change with changes to Government personnel policy to allow for the engagement of stenographers to provide this service. For the time being, it therefore remains the obligation of the parties, with the approval of the judge, to make their private arrangements for these services in civil cases. By the agreement of the parties and with the approval of the judge, the private stenographer's notes and transcriptions may be deemed the official record of the proceedings. Failing such agreement and approval, the judge's notes of the proceedings will be the official record. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. Digital audio recording for chambers proceedings. The Judicial Administration will continue to provide digital audio recording equipment for the recording of chambers proceedings in all divisions of the Grand Court. Such recordings will be made (with the prior approval of the judge) and the disc provided to the parties for transcription at their expense. The transcription will not be regarded as an authorised transcript of the proceedings unless and until so approved by the judge; failing which, the judge's notes of the proceedings will be the official record. 6. Back Up Audio Recordings (BUARs) \uf0b7 Such recordings will be made (with the prior approval of the judge) and the disc provided to the parties for transcription at their expense. \uf0b7 BUARs, where they are made, will be the work product of the stenographers, kept for their assistance in providing the official transcripts of the court. \uf0b7 The BUARs are not expected to be provided to anyone unless so ordered by the court under the following circumstances. \uf0b7 Upon a written application explaining why it is thought that any part of an official transcript is erroneous, a judge may direct that the BUARs are played back by the stenographer for comparison with the official transcript. This will be allowed in criminal cases only and when Defence and Crown Counsel are both present or where the applicant is a defendant in person, only when the defendant (or an authorised representative) and Crown Counsel are both present. \uf0b7 A written record will be made of the exercise and of the outcome by the stenographer and must be signed by the stenographer and both parties. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \uf0b7 Where a discrepancy is found as between the BUARs and the official transcript, this will immediately be brought to the attention of a judge (preferably the trial judge if available) who will decide (if appropriate after consultation with the parties) what steps if any should be taken. \uf0b7 In no circumstances will BUARs simply be handed over to any party.2 \uf0b7 BUARs (when kept and relied upon by the stenographer for provision of transcripts) will be kept for a period of 5 years to allow for the expiry of any time for appeal. 4 August 2017. 2 This direction, while recognising the right of an accused person under section 7 of the Constitution to any record of the proceedings (cf State of Mauritius [2017] UK PC 16), also recognises the need for the proper management of the Court Records of and of the demands upon the time of Court officials, in particular the court stenographers. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017 Filing of Winding Up Petitions The filing of a petition to wind up a company if publicised can cause irreparable harm to its reputation, even if the petition is ultimately dismissed for lack of merit. To address this mischief, the Companies Winding Up Rules (CWRs) prescribe a certain procedure for the filing of winding up petitions. These are in CWR Rules 5, 1 and 14, dealing respectively with the Creditor's, Contributory's and Cayman Islands Monetary Authority's petitions. 1. Creditor's Petition (a) In keeping with CWR Rule 5, prior to presenting a creditor's petition, the petitioner's attorney must apply in writing (by letter or email) to the FSD Registrar to have the proceeding assigned to a Judge and to fix a hearing date. (b) A creditor's petition shall not be filed or entered upon the Register of Writs and Actions (the \\\"Register\\\") unless and until the proceeding has been assigned to a Judge and a hearing date has been fixed and endorsed on the petition or stated in a notice of hearing filed simultaneously with the petition. (c) Where the Judge has made an order restricting the filing or otherwise the publication of the petition, the petition may not be entered on the Register other than in keeping with the terms of the order or subsequent order. 2. Contributory's Petition (a) Upon presentation of a contributory's petition, the petitioner must at the same time issue a summons for directions in respect of the matters contained in CWR Rule 12, which will include directions as to whether or not the petition is to be advertised. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (b) Prior to presenting a contributory's petition and issuing the summons for directions in respect of it, the petitioner\u2019s attorney must apply in writing (by letter or by email) to the FSD Registrar to have the proceeding assigned to a Judge and to fix a date for hearing the summons for directions. (c) Unless and until the Judge has fixed a date for hearing the summons for directions or otherwise directs, the petition shall not be entered upon the Register. 3. Authority's Petition (a) Prior to presenting a petition, the Authority's attorney must apply in writing (by letter or email) to the FSD Registrar to have the proceeding assigned to a Judge and to fix a date for hearing the summons for directions. (b) Upon the presentation of a petition by the Authority, the Authority must at the same time issue a summons for directions in respect of the matters contained in CWR Rule 15. A petition presented by the Authority shall not be advertised or entered in the Register unless and until the Judge otherwise directs. Chief Justice 4 August 2017 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Court-to-court communications and cooperation in cross-border insolvency and restructuring cases The Guidelines \u2013 what they cover and when they should be used. 1.  This practice direction deals with the use and adoption in cases pending before the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (Court) of published guidelines relating to court-to-court communications and cooperation in cross-border insolvency and restructuring proceedings. 2.  There are two main sets of guidelines (Guidelines) for court-to-court communications and cooperation which might be adopted in this jurisdiction, with appropriate modifications. These are the American Law Institute\/International Insolvency Institute Guidelines Applicable to Court-to-Court Communications in Cross-Border Cases and The Judicial Insolvency Network Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters. Copies of the current versions of both sets of Guidelines are attached to this Practice Direction. 3. The Guidelines primarily cover the procedural rules that may be adopted and applied in particular cross-border cases for regulating the manner of communications between the courts involved, the appearance of counsel in each court, notification to parties in parallel proceedings, the acceptance as authentic of official documents or orders made in the foreign jurisdiction or court and joint hearings. They are to be applied either by being incorporated in a protocol between the respective officeholders which protocol is then approved by the Court (and other courts involved as required) or by a separate order of the Court without a protocol (and orders of the other courts involved as GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 required), in each case subject to such modifications as may be required in the circumstances. 4.  The Guidelines are relevant where the insolvency or restructuring proceedings are being supervised by, or involve related applications to, courts in more than one jurisdiction. Such proceedings will include liquidation (including provisional and voluntary liquidation) and other insolvency or restructuring proceedings involving applications to court. Accordingly, the Guidelines will be relevant to schemes of arrangement relating to a company being supervised by the Court which also involve a parallel scheme (or debt adjustment proceeding) or ancillary proceedings in another jurisdiction (and may also be relevant in cases in which the Court has appointed a receiver or other officer of the Court and where the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority has appointed a controller pursuant to the Cayman Islands regulatory laws). The Guidelines can apply whether the officeholder is appointed by the Court or is appointed out of Court and whether the person is appointed in respect of a company (incorporated in the Cayman Islands or abroad) other legal entity (established in the Cayman Islands or abroad) or an individual. 5.  Officeholders appointed in the Cayman Islands, companies subject to restructuring proceedings supervised by the Court and other interested parties involved in cross-border insolvency cases should consider, at the earliest opportunity, whether to incorporate some or all of the Guidelines with suitable modifications either into an international protocol to be approved by the Court or an order of the Court adopting the Guidelines. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Official liquidators of Cayman Islands companies 6.  Official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated companies subject to an official liquidation under Part V of the Companies Act (as amended and revised) are already under a duty, pursuant to Order 21, r.2(1) of the Companies Winding Up Rules (CWRs), to consider whether or not it is appropriate to enter into an international protocol with any foreign officeholder (in a case in which the company in liquidation is subject to a concurrent bankruptcy proceeding under the law of a foreign country or has assets located in a foreign country which are the subject of a bankruptcy proceeding or receivership under the law of that country). The purpose of such a protocol is to promote the orderly administration of the estate of the company to avoid duplication of work and conflict between the official liquidator and the foreign officeholder (CWR O.21, r.2(2)) and the protocol only takes effect when approved both by the Court and the foreign court (CWR O.21, r.2(3)). The CWRs provide that the protocol may define and allocate responsibilities between the official liquidator and the foreign officeholder in respect of the various matters set out in CWR O.21, r.3. These include procedures for the exchange of information between the officeholders; procedures for reporting to creditors and\/or contributories and procedures for coordinating sanction applications made to the Grand Court and the foreign court. Consideration should be given by official liquidators to the incorporation of the Guidelines into the international protocol. 7.  While official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated companies are required to consider whether to enter into an international protocol which deals with the matters set out in CWR O.21, r.3 they are not required to limit any protocol they enter into to such matters. The protocol may, subject to the approval of the Court, cover other matters GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 including court-to-court communications and cooperation as provided for in the Guidelines. In addition, even if official liquidators conclude that a protocol is not appropriate (or that it is not appropriate to incorporate the Guidelines into such a protocol) the Guidelines with suitable modifications may be adopted by an order of the Court which gives directions with respect to the procedures to be followed. Other Cayman Islands officeholders 8.  While it is only official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated companies subject to an official liquidation who have a duty under the CWR to consider entering into an international protocol, other Cayman Islands officeholders or companies subject to restructuring proceedings supervised by the Court may enter into a protocol incorporating the Guidelines or may apply for an order adopting the Guidelines and this Practice Direction will apply in such cases. 9.  To the extent that Cayman Islands officeholders or companies subject to restructuring proceedings supervised by the Court are unclear as to the manner in which to use and apply the Guidelines in any particular case, they may apply to the Court at any early stage in the proceedings for directions. Hon. Anthony Smellie May 31, 2018 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019 DIRECTIONS FOR PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER SECTION 238 OF THE COMPANIES ACT Upon the presentation of a petition pursuant to section 238 of the Companies Act (as amended and revised), the party presenting the petition must at the same time issue a summons seeking directions in respect of the following matters: 1. The opening and population of, and access to, an indexed electronic data room (or other proposal) for maintaining documents relevant to the fair value of the subject company as of the relevant valuation date (the \\\"Valuation Date\\\"). 2. The discovery and inspection of documents relevant to the fair value of the subject company as at the Valuation Date (including any documents that should be specifically discovered), inclusive of documents existing both before and after the Valuation Date. 3. The provision of any lay evidence (if appropriate). 4. The provision of any expert evidence including: (a) the instruction and disciplines of expert witnesses; (b) the convening and conduct of meetings between expert witnesses and members of the management of the subject company; (c) the request by, and responses to, expert witnesses for documents and information relevant to the fair value of the subject company; (d) the exchange of expert witness reports; (e) meetings of experts and the provision of a joint expert memorandum; and (f) the exchange of supplemental expert witness reports. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. The manner in which evidence is to be given. 6. If evidence is directed to be given by affidavit, directions relating to cross-examination of the deponent\/s. 7. The listing of any case management conference. 8. The listing of the trial of the petition. 9. Such other procedural matters as the party thinks fit. February 26, 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Adoption of Judicial Insolvency Network Modalities For Court-To-Court Communications 1. The Grand Court Financial Services Division (\u201cFSD\u201d) adopted the Judicial Insolvency Network (\u201cJIN\u201d) Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Cases on 31 May, 2018 (see Practice Direction No. 1 of 2018). 2. JIN adopted the Modalities of Court-to-Court Communication on 25 July 2019 (the \u201cModalities\u201d). The Modalities are designed to establish an administrative framework within which the JIN Guidelines will operate. 3. The FSD hereby adopts the Modalities as set out in the Appendix hereto with effect from 1 August 2019. 4. Pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Modalities, the FSD appoints Justice Ian RC Kawaley of the FSD as the Facilitator. 5. Pursuant to paragraph 7 of the Modalities, the FSD identifies English as the language in which initial communications may be made. Dated this 31st day of July 2019 Hon. Anthony Smellie Chief Justice GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 APPENDIX MODALITIES OF COURT-TO-COURT COMMUNICATION Scope and definitions 1.  These Modalities apply to direct communications (written or oral) between courts in specific cases of cross-border proceedings relating to insolvency or adjustment of debt opened in more than one jurisdiction (\u201cParallel Proceedings\u201d). Nothing in this document precludes indirect means of communication between courts, such as through the parties or by exchange of transcripts, etc. This document is subject to any applicable law. 2.  These Modalities govern only the mechanics of communication between courts in Parallel Proceedings. For the principles of communication (e.g., that court to-court communications should not interfere with or derogate from the jurisdiction or the exercise of jurisdiction by a court in any proceedings, etc.), reference may be made to the Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters (the \u201cGuidelines\u201d) issued by the Judicial Insolvency Network in October 2016. 3.  These Modalities contemplate contact being initiated by an \u201cInitiating Judge\u201d (defined below). The parties before such judge may request that Judge to initiate such contact, or the Initiating Judge may seek it on that Intitating Judge\u2019s own initiative. 4.  In this document: (a)  \u201cInitiating Judge\u201d refers to the judge initiating communication in the first instance; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (b)  \u201cReceiving Judge\u201d refers to the judge receiving communication in the first instance; (c)  \u201cFacilitator\u201d refers to the person(s) designated by the court where the Initiating Judge sits or the court where the Receiving Judge sits (as the case may be) to initiate or receive communications on behalf of the Initiating Judge or the Receiving Judge in relation to Parallel Proceedings. Designation of Facilitator 5.  Each court may designate one or more judges or administrative officials as the Facilitator. It is recommended that, where the Facilitator is not a judge, a judge be designated to supervise the initial steps in the communication process. 6.  Courts should prominently publish the identities and contact details of their Facilitators, such as on their websites. 7.  Courts should prominently list the language(s) in which initial communications may be made and the technology available to facilitate communication between or among courts (e.g. telephonic and\/or video conference capabilities, any secure channel email capacity, etc.). Initiating communication 8.  To initiate communication in the first instance, the Initiating Judge may require the parties over whom that Judge exercises jurisdiction to obtain the identity and contact details of the Facilitator of the other court in the Parallel Proceedings, unless the information is already known to the Initiating Judge. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 9.  The first contact with the Receiving Judge should be in writing, including by email, from the Facilitator of the Initiating Judge\u2019s court to the Facilitator of the Receiving Judge\u2019s court, and contain the following: (a)  the name and contact details of the Facilitator of the Initiating Judge\u2019s court; (b)  the name and title of the Initiating Judge as well as contact details of the Initiating Judge in the event that the Receiving Judge wishes to contact the Initiating Judge directly and such contact is acceptable to the Initiating Judge; (c)  the reference number and title of the case filed before the Initiating Judge and the reference number and title (if known; otherwise, some other identifier) of the case filed before the Receiving Judge in the Parallel Proceedings; (d)  the nature of the case (with due regard to confidentiality concerns); (e)  whether the parties before the Initiating Judge have consented to the communication taking place (if there is any order of court, direction or protocol for court-to-court communication for the case approved by the Initiating Judge, this information should also be provided); (f) if appropriate, the proposed date and time for the communication requested (with due regard to time differences); and (g)  the specific issue(s) on which communication is sought by the Initiating Judge. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Arrangements for communication 10. The Facilitator of the Initiating Judge\u2019s court and the Facilitator of the Receiving Judge\u2019s court may communicate fully with each other to establish appropriate arrangements for the communication without the necessity for participation of counsel or the parties unless otherwise ordered by one of the courts. 11. The time, method and language of communication should be to the satisfaction of the Initiating Judge and the Receiving Judge, with due regard given to the need for efficient management of the Parallel Proceedings. 12. Where translation or interpretation services are required, appropriate arrangements shall be made, as agreed by the courts. Where written communication is provided through translation, the communication in its original form should also be provided. 13. Where it is necessary for confidential information to be communicated, a secure means of communication should be employed where possible. Communication between the Initiating Judge and the Receiving Judge 14.  After the arrangements for communication have been made, discussion of the specific issue(s) on which communication was sought by the Initiating Judge and subsequent communications in relation thereto should, as far as possible, be carried out between the Initiating Judge and the Receiving Judge in accordance with any protocol or order for communication and cooperation in the Parallel Proceedings. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 15.  If the Receiving Judge wishes to by-pass the use of a Facilitator, and the Initiating Judge has indicated that that Initiating Judge is amenable, the judges may communicate with each other about the arrangements for the communication without the necessity for the participation of counsel or the parties. 16.  Nothing in this document should limit the discretion of the Initiating Judge to contact the Receiving Judge directly in exceptional circumstances.1 1 http:\/\/jin-global.org\/content\/jin\/pdf\/Modalities_for_court-to-court_communication.pdf Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT: COSTS ESTIMATES The costs incurred in the Family Division of the Grand Court are, in a great number of cases, disproportionally high in relation to (i) the value of assets involved; or (ii) the realistic amount of child\/spousal maintenance being claimed, or (iii) the nature of the children issues. Often a Judge will be unable to make a realistic determination in financial ancillary relief proceedings without an indication of costs incurred and\/or an approximate indication of anticipated costs of each side. It is, moreover, in the interests of the parties themselves that each should be aware, throughout the proceedings, of the actual and potential liability for costs. Therefore: (I)  Subject  to paragraph (2), no later than 3 p.m. on the last working day prior to each court hearing each party shall exchange with each other and deliver to the court a written estimate in Form A of the costs incurred by each party up to the date of that hearing. (2)  Not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the final hearing of an application for ancillary relief, each party must (unless the Court directs otherwise) file with the Court and serve on the other party a statement in Form B giving full particulars of all costs in respect of the proceedings which each party has incurred or expects to incur, to enable the court to take account of the parties' liabilities for costs when deciding what order (if any) to make for ancillary relief. Non-compliance with this Practice Direction may have a consequence. To the extent necessary for the proper management or disposal of the case that compliance be insisted upon, orders for costs can be made against either party in default or against defaulting lawyers. Those who default may find GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 that their case is put to the end of the court list or the case may be taken out of the list altogether. Dated this 25th   day of September 2019 Attachments:     Form A Form B Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019 Criminal Procedure - Remand Warrants where defendant found unfit to plead - Committal Warrants where defendant found to be not guilty by reason of insanity l.  By sections 48 and 122 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (\\\"the Code\\\"), persons who are found to be unfit to plead are described as \\\" of unsound mind and incapable of making (his or her) defence\\\" or as \\\"insane and unfit to stand triaI\\\". Such persons are awaiting trial as defendants and, where not released on bail into the custody of a guardian in keeping with section 48(2), are remanded by the Court on report to the Governor, pending fitness to stand trial. The Governor may then order the defendant to be detained in any hospital or other place appointed which will usually be His Majesty's Prison [(Northward or Fairbanks) as the case may be] because there is, for the time being, no other facility available. It is therefore required that warrants for remand of such defendants suitably describe their condition by specifying the basis upon which they are remanded. Accordingly, a warrant for remand of such a defendant shall specify, in keeping with section 48(3) of the Code, that \\\"the defendant has been found by the Court to be un fit to stand trial and is remanded to His Majesty's Prison [(Northward or Fairbanks) as the case may be] until further order of the Court or until discharged by order of the Governor\\\". In keeping with section 50 of the Code, the proceedings may be later resumed by the direction of the Court. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2. Similar concerns attend the committal of persons who have been found not guilty by reason of insanity pursuant to section 158 and are to be remanded pursuant to section 159 of the Code. Section 159(1) provides that the Court shall order such persons to be conveyed to any hospital or other place for the time being appointed under any law to be a mental hospital and for the reception of criminally insane persons, there to be kept until discharged by the Governor. For the time being, the place appointed is His Majesty's Prison Northward [(or Fairbanks as the case might be)]. Accordingly, a warrant for committal of such a person shall specify that \\\"he\/she has been found to be not guilty by reason  of  insanity  and shall  be  conveyed  to  His Majesty 's Prison Northward [(or Fairbanks)]  as  the  place  for  the  time  being appointed for the reception of criminally insane persons there to be kept  until discharged by order of the Governor\\\". 3. This Practice Direction will be revised and reissued once another place is appointed for the reception of persons who are found to be unfit to plead or not guilty by reason of insanity. October 21, 2019 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 MEDIATION INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT RULES 2020 Introduction Mediation of family disputes offers many advantages over resolution of disputes through the court. Consequently, the court actively monitors all family disputes to determine whether the couples concerned should attend a meeting with a family mediator to learn about the mediation process and the merits of mediation over litigation in court. Although mediation is suitable for many family disputes, it is not suitable in all cases and the Mediation Information and Assessment Rules (as emended and revised) (\u201cMIAM Rules\u201d) provide for exemptions. It is also recognised that drug and\/or alcohol abuse, and\/or mental illness, are likely to prevent couples from participating effectively in mediation. Summary 1. The purpose of this Practice Direction is to provide guidance in respect of the MIAM Rules and to set out good practice to be followed by respondents who are expected to also attend a MIAM. 2. Under the MIAM Rules it is now presumed that if a person makes certain kinds of applications the parties will be ordered to attend a MIAM before continuing with the application. (A list of these applications is set out in Rule 6.) The court has a general power to adjourn proceedings in order for non-court dispute resolution to be attempted, including attendance at a MIAM to consider family mediation and other options. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3. A MIAM is a short meeting that provides information about mediation as a way of resolving disputes. A MIAM is conducted by a trained mediator who will assess whether mediation is appropriate in the circumstances. A MIAM should be held within 28 days after an order for referral from the court. 4. There are exemptions to the MIAM presumption. They are set out in the MIAM Rules. 5. The effect of the MIAM presumption and the MIAM Rules is that a person who makes certain kinds of applications to the court must first attend a MIAM unless a ' MIAM exemption' applies. These exemptions are set out in Rule 8. 6. When making certain kinds of applications (see paragraphs 12 and 13 below), an applicant must therefore provide on the relevant form one of the following \u2014 (i) confirmation from a mediator that (s)he has attended a MIAM; or (ii) a claim that a MIAM exemption applies. An applicant who claims an exemption from the MIAM requirement is not required to attach any supporting evidence with that applicant\u2019s application, but should bring any supporting evidence to the first appointment hearing. 7. If an applicant claims a MIAM exemption, at the first appointment hearing before the Grand Court or at the initial hearing before the Summary Court, the court will inquire into the exemption claimed. At the first appointment hearing before the Grand Court or at the initial hearing before the Summary Court, the court may review any supporting evidence in order to ensure that the MIAM exemption was validly claimed. As set out in more detail below, if a MIAM exemption has not been validly claimed, the court may direct the parties to attend a MIAM, and may adjourn proceedings for that purpose. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Background: Consideration of mediation and other non-court dispute resolution 8. The adversarial court process is not always best suited to the resolution of family disputes. Such disputes are often best resolved through discussion and agreement, where that can be managed safely and appropriately. 9. Family mediation is one way of settling disagreements. A trained mediator can help the parties to reach an agreement. A mediator who conducts a MIAM is an independent facilitator who can also discuss other forms of dispute resolution if mediation is not appropriate. 10. Attendance at a MIAM provides an opportunity for the parties to a dispute to receive information about the process of mediation and to understand the benefits it can offer as a way to resolve disputes. At that meeting, a trained mediator will discuss with the parties the nature of their dispute and will explore with them whether mediation would be a suitable way to resolve the issues on which there is disagreement. The applications to which the MIAM presumption applies 11. The MIAM presumption applies to private law proceedings relating to children and proceedings for a financial remedy as set out in Rule 1. Making an application 12. An application to the court in any of the proceedings specified above must be accompanied by the relevant court form which must contain either: (a) a confirmation from a mediator that the applicant has attended a MIAM; or (b) a claim by the applicant that a MIAM exemption applies (the list of MIAM exemptions is set out in Rule 8(l)). 13. The relevant form can be completed either by the applicant or that applicant\u2019s attorney. Any reference in this Practice Direction or in the Rules to completion of the form by an applicant includes a reference to completion by an attorney. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 MIAM exemptions 14. Rule 8(1) sets out the circumstances in which the MIAM presumption does not apply. These are called MIAMS exemptions. 15. In order to claim that a MIAM exemption applies, an applicant will need to complete the relevant form. 16. Applicants should note that some of the MIAM exemptions require that certain evidence is available. This evidence does not need to be provided with the application but applicants should bring such evidence to the first appointment hearing because the court will inquire into such evidence in order to determine whether the MIAM exemption has been validly claimed. Finding a family mediator 17. As set out in Rule 9, only a family mediator may conduct a MIAM. Under that Rule, a family mediator is a Grand Court Judge who is assigned to the Family Division, or a Magistrate, or one of the persons or class of persons identified in the Schedule to this Practice Direction as may be issued from time to time by the Chief Justice. 18. Further information about mediation including a list of family mediators and their contact details can be found at www.judicial.ky. MIAM exemption: Inquiries by the court\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_19\", \"num\": \"19.\", \"text\": \"Where a MIAM exemption requires that an applicant supply certain evidence to support that applicant\u2019s claim to the exemption, (s)he should bring that evidence to the first appointment hearing.  At that hearing the court will inquire into that evidence to determine whether (s)he has a valid claim to that MIAM exem ption.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_20\", \"num\": \"20.\", \"text\": \"The court may, if appropriate, adjourn proceedings where the applicant is unable to supply that evidence or it may give directions about how and when the applicant is to file such evidence with the court. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_21\", \"num\": \"21.\", \"text\": \"If the court determines that the applicant has not validly claimed a MIAM exemption, it may direct the parties, to attend a MIAM and may adjourn proceedings pending attendance at that MIAM. Definitions\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_22\", \"num\": \"22.\", \"text\": \"For the purpose of this Practice Direction the definitio ns in the MIAM Rules apply. Pursuant to Rule 1 of the MIAM Rules the Schedule to this Practice Direction sets out a list of family mediators. Revocation of Practice Direction No 2 of 2016\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_23\", \"num\": \"23.\", \"text\": \"Practice Direction No 2 of 2016 is hereby revoked. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SCHEDULE TO PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2020 Chief Justice Anthony Smellie Justice Richard Williams Justice Robin McMillan Justice Cheryll Richards Chief Magistrate Nova Hall Magistrate Kirsty Gunn Magistrate Angelyn Hernandez Magistrate Philippa McFarlane Mrs. Leslie Talbot Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 COVID 19: GUIDANCE FOR THE FAMILY DIVISION - 25 MARCH 2020 1.  This Guidance, which is issued by the Chief Justice, is intended to be followed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division. 2.  The aim of the Guidance is to 'Keep Business Going Safely'. There is a strong public interest in the Family Justice System continuing to function as normally as possible despite the present pandemic. At the same time, in accordance with government guidance, there is a need for all reasonable and sensible precautions to be taken to prevent infection and, in particular, to avoid non-essential personal contact. 3.  The government guidance is, however, primarily aimed at the social setting, rather than the business\/work environment. Depending on the circumstances there may be the need, and no harm involved, in having a number of people present in court for an oral hearing. 4.  Taking these competing factors together, whilst the default position should be that, for the time being, all Family Division hearings should be undertaken remotely either via email, telephone, video or Zoom, etc ['remote hearing'], where the requirements of fairness and justice require a court-based hearing, and it is safe to conduct one, then a courtbased hearing should take place. The Court will ensure that the appropriate distancing measures set out in the Family Division protocols are put in place. Practice Directions and Guidance 5.  Grand Court Practice Directions No. 2 of 2004 \u201cProceedings by way of Video Conferencing Civil or Criminal\u201d and the accompanying \u2018Video Conferencing Guide\u201d were issued by the Chief Justice on 16th May GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 2004. The use of remote hearings in appropriate cases is consistent with the Court\u2019s duty under the Overriding Objective to deal with every cause or matter in a just, expeditious and economical way. Video conferencing has been used in the Grand Court for a number of years. The Family Division has in appropriate cases held hearings and received evidence by telephone or by using any other method of direct oral communication. In the current circumstance where facilities are available to the court and the parties, the Court should consider making full use of technology, including electronic information exchange and video or telephone conferencing. Remote hearings 6.  There is no category of case that may be listed in the Family Division which necessarily requires the physical attendance of key participants in the same courtroom. The determination of whether or not a remote hearing is to take place will not therefore turn on the estimated length of the hearing but upon other case specific factors. 7.  The following categories may be suitable for remote hearings: a. All directions and case management hearings b. Public Law Children: i. Emergency Protection Order ii Interim Care\/Supervision Orders c. Private Law Children: i. First appointment Hearings on Family Mention Days ii. Other interim hearings iii. Simple short contested cases d. Injunction applications where there is no evidence that is to be heard (or only limited evidence) e. Financial Cases f. Appeals Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 g. Other hearings as directed by the judge concerned 8.  Where a case in one category listed in paragraph 7 above has already been listed for a hearing at which the parties are due to attend court then, if it is possible to make arrangements for a fixed hearing to be conducted remotely, the hearing should go ahead remotely without any personal attendance at court. A draft directions order is at Appendix A below. 9.  It is possible that other cases may also be suitable to be dealt with remotely. As the current situation is changing rapidly, the question of whether any particular case is heard remotely must be determined on a case-by-case basis. 10.  Where a case cannot be listed for a remote hearing as matters stand then any existing listing should be adjourned and the case must be listed promptly for a directions hearing, which should be conducted remotely. The primary aim of the directions hearing should be to identify the optimal method of conducting the court process in order to achieve a fair and just hearing of the issues but, at the same time, minimising as much as possible the degree of inter-personal contact between each participant. In appropriate cases, this may involve the use of a remote hearing where it is possible to conduct the court process in a manner that achieves a fair and just consideration of the issues. Although consideration may be given as to whether it is possible to conduct a complicated extensive multi-party hearing using the Zoom system, in such cases it may be necessary for the personal attendance at court, for some or all of the hearing, by some or all of the participants. 11. At any directions hearing to discuss the future hearing arrangements, judges should also require the parties to focus on the realistic options that are currently available to meet the child\u2019s welfare needs during the present straitened circumstances. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Urgent Cases 12. Even where a case is urgent, it should be possible for arrangements to be made for it to be conducted remotely. The default position should be that the hearing is conducted remotely. Where a case is genuinely urgent, and it is not possible to conduct a remote hearing and there is a need for pressing issues to be determined, then the court should endeavour to conduct a face-to-face hearing in circumstances (in terms of the physical arrangement of the court room and in the waiting area) which minimise the opportunity for infection. Remote Hearings: technical matters 13. Remote hearings may be conducted using the following facilities as appropriate to the individual case: a.  By way of an email exchange between the court and the parties; b.  By way of telephone using conference calling facilities; c.  By way of the court's video-link system, if available; d.  The use of Zoom; e.  Any other appropriate means of remote communication, for example Skype or Face Time. The Court IT Department will assist to make the arrangements for Zoom and will provide advice to participants about to use Zoom. If you are unfamiliar with Zoom here is the help page from Zoom https:\/\/support.zoom.us\/hc\/en-us\/articles\/206618765-Zoom-VideoTutoriaIs and further guidance and video https:\/\/learninginbloom.com\/use-zoom\/ 14. The Judge may require certain hearings to be recorded. Where Zoom is used, there is a facility within the software for the digital record of the hearing to be recorded (this is not the same as a typed transcript but may suffice for most purposes). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 15. The responsibility for making technical and other arrangements for a remote hearing and for confirming the details of the arrangements for the hearing to the other parties no later than 24 hours prior to the remote hearing taking place is to be undertaken by the following party liaising with the court: a.  The Department of Children and Family Services in a public law case; b.  The applicant, if legally represented, in a private law case; c.  The respondent, if legally represented and where the applicant is not, in a private law case; d.  The court where no party is legally represented. 16.  When conducting a remote hearing, there is a need for the judge to use their best endeavours to ensure that only those who would be allowed into the court room for an oral hearing are privy to the remote hearing and that all parties understand that the system used by the court will record the proceedings and that no other recording is to be made by any of the parties. 17.  On the day before a remote hearing the applicant must electronically file a PDF bundle which complies with Practice Direction No. 11\/2014, and which in any event must include as a minimum: a.  A case summary and chronology; b.  The parties' positions statements; c.  The previous orders that are relevant to the remote hearing; d.  All essential documents that the court requires to determine the issues that fall for determination at the remote hearing; e.  A draft order; Final Observation 18. These are exceptional and unprecedented times. The situation is changing daily. This Guidance is intended to deliver a very significant change of direction in the method of working within the Family Division, whilst at the same time enabling the Court to continue to GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 operate and to meet the pressing needs of those who turn to it for protection and justice. 25 March 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 APPENDIX A In the Grand Court No: ______ Family Division\/ The Family Court IN THE MATTER OF ______________ AND IN THE MATTER OF _________________ CHILDREN BEFORE __________ SITTING AT _________ ON  _______ UPON the Court determining that in the exceptional circumstances of the current public health emergency this case is suitable for hearing remotely ('remote hearing') by means of [video link]\/ [Skype]\/ [telephone]\/ [other]. BY ITS OWN MOTION\/ BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. All hearings in this matter shall take place by way of remote hearing unless the court directs otherwise. 2. The parties and their representatives shall attend all hearings by way of [video link]\/[Skype]\/[telephone]\/[ other]. 3. No unauthorised person may be present at this hearing. When asked, each legal representative must be able to confirm that no unauthorised person is in attendance or able to listen to the hearing. 4. This matter shall be listed for a remote hearing on___________ at_________ before ___________sitting at__________________ with a time estimate of _________ . 5. The parties shall arrange and attend remotely an Attorneys Meeting no less than 48 hours before the hearing listed above. 6. The [applicant\/respondent] shall be responsible for arranging with the Judge's Personal Assistant\/The Court IT Department the necessary facilities to conduct a remote hearing, allowing sufficient time for any necessary testing to take place. This will include provision to the court of the necessary contact details for the parties and their representatives where these are needed to facilitate the remote hearing. 7. The [applicant\/respondent) must confirm the details of the arrangements for the hearing to the other parties by no later than 24 hours prior to the remote hearing taking place. 8. The applicant shall by 1600 hrs on the day before the hearing electronically file a PDF bundle, which must include: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (a) A case summary and chronology; (b) The parties positions statements; (c) The previous orders that are relevant to the remote hearing; (d) All essential documents that the court requires to determine the issues that fall for determination at the remote hearing; (e) A draft order; 9. [Further Directions]... Dated ______________ Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020 FAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS 1. This Guidance, which is approved by the Chief Justice, is intended to be followed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division. It should be read in conjunction with (i) the Protocol \\\"COVID19: Guidance for the Family Division\\\" issued by the Chief Justice on 29 March 2020. 2. All family cases which have already been listed for a hearing will be listed promptly for a directions hearing, which should be conducted remotely. The parties will be contacted and provided with the time and date of the hearing. If a party is unable to attend the due date then they must promptly notify Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) and obtain a new date convenient to all the parties. 3. Any new hearing in a family case which is not listed on a Family Mention Day will be listed promptly for a directions hearing. The parties will be contacted and provided with the time and date of the hearing. If a party is unable to attend the due date then they must promptly notify Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) and obtain a new date convenient to all the parties. 4. The primary aim of the directions hearing will be to identify whether the substantive hearing can be heard remotely. If it is unclear whether it can then, at the directions hearing, the Court will consider the optimal method of conducting the Court process in order to achieve a fair and just hearing of the issues but, at the same time, minimising as much as possible the degree of inter-personal contact between each participant. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. If it decided at  the  directions  hearing  that  it  is  possible  to  make arrangements  for the already fixed hearing to be  conducted  remote ly,  then  the  hearing  should  go ahead remotely  without any  personal attendance  at  Court.  A draft directions   order is at Appendix A below. 6. The directions hearings and any hearings to be heard remotely will now be dealt with remotely by Zoom. If you are unfamiliar with Zoom here is the help page from Zoom https:\/\/support.zoom.us\/he\/en-us\/a rticles\/ 206618765 -Zoom-Video-Tutorials and further guidance and video https:\/\/learninginbloom.com\/use-zoom\/. 7. The attorneys and any litigants in person will, well in advance of the hearing, be provided with details of the hearing and a link that they will need to use to enable them to access the Zoom hearing. If they have not received these details then they should contact Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883). 8. It is important that the parties are available to enter the Zoom hearing at the set time and that they be prepared to wait as there may be a delay caused by a previous matter in the list overrunning. A Zoom connection test should be arranged with Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hear ing. 9. Each litigant and their attorney can attend the Zoom hearing from different locations. The screen will enable each person attending the meeting to be seen and each attendee can be heard. The Court may use the 'speaker view' in which the person speaking will appear as the main image on the screen and the other attendees will appear in sm all individual boxes at the top of the screen. The Judge will lead the meeting and will initially appear as the main image on screen. The Judge will then invite the other attendees to speak in turn and when that person is speaking he\/she will appear as the main image on the screen. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 It is important that only one person speak at a time and only when invited by the Judge to do so. The Court may also use the 'gallery view' in which each person will appear in an equal size box on the screen throughout the hearing. At the start of the hearing, the Judge will recommend, depending on the number of attendees, which view should be used. 10. If a party is unable to attend by Zoom because they do not have adequate internet access, the Court will arrange for that party to attend the hearing by telephone. That attendee will be able to hear the other attendees speak and be able to speak during the hearing. At the time set for the hearing, the party will need to dial 1-30171-58592 followed by the meeting ID and the # sign. The attendee must contact Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hearing if telephone attendance is sought in order for them to be provided with the required meeting ID. A Zoom\/telephone connection test should be arranged with Mrs. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hearing. 11. It is important that all litigants and attorneys ensure that Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) is provided with their up-to-date email and telephone details and promptly notified of any changes made to them. 29 March 2020 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020 FAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS - FAMILY MENTION DAYS 1. This Guidance, which is approved by the Chief Justice, is intended to be followed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division. It should be read in conjunction with (i) the Protocol \\\"COVID19: Guidance for the Family Division\\\"  issued by the  Chief Justice on 29 March 2020 and (ii) Practice Direction No. 6\/2012 \\\"Listing of Family Law Proceedings.\\\" 2. The days already allocated for Family Mention Days will remain. These dates are 16 April, 17 April, 14 May, 15 May, 28 May, 29 May, 1 June, 12 June, 25 June, 26 June 2020. All cases already listed on a Family Mention Day will still be heard at the same time on the same date. Additional cases will be added to the existing Family Mention Days and new Family Mention Days will be created. 3. All presently listed Family Mention Day cases and any cases added to the Family Mention Day list will now be dealt with remotely by Zoom. If you are unfamiliar with Zoom here is the help page from Zoom https:\/\/support.zoom.us\/ hc\/ en-us\/ articles\/206618765-Zoom-VideoTutorials and further guidance and video https:\/\/learning inbloom.com\/use-zoom\/. 4. The attorneys and any litigants in person will, well in advance of the hearing, be provided with details of the hearing and a link that they will need to use to enable them to access the Zoom hearing. If they have not received these details then they should contact Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. It is important that the parties are available to enter the Zoom hearing at the set time and that they be prepared to wait as there may be a delay caused by a previous matter in the list overrunning. A Zoom connection test should be arranged with Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hearing. 6. Each litigant and their attorney can attend the Zoom hearing from different locations. The screen will enable each person attending the meeting to be seen and each attendee can be heard. The Court may use the 'speaker view' in which the person speaking will appear as the main image on the screen and the other attendees will appear in small individual boxes at the top of the screen. The Judge will lead the meeting and will initially appear as the main image on screen. The Judge will then invite the other attendees to speak in turn and when that person is speaking he\/she will appear as the main image on the screen. It is import ant that only one person speak at a time and only when invited by the Judge to do so. The Court may also use the 'gallery view' in which each person will appear in an equal size box on the screen throughout the hearing. At the start of the hearing, the Judge will recommend, depending on the number of attendees, which view should be used. 7. If a party is unable to attend by Zoom because they do not have adequate internet access, the Court will arrange for that party to attend the hearing by telephone. That attendee will be able to hear the other attendees speak and be able to speak during the hearing. At the time set for the hearing, the party will need to dial 1-30171-58592 followed by GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the meeting ID number and the # sign. The attendee must contact Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hearing if telephone attendance is sought, in order for them to be provided with the required meeting ID number. A Zoom\/telephone connection test should be arranged with Mrs. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of the hearing. 8. It is important that all litigants and attorneys ensure that Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) is provided with their up-to-date email and details and promptly notified of any changes made to them. 29 March 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 THE USE OF E-MAILS FOR FILING AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, COURT SEALS AND STAMPS In order to continue to provide access to justice while operating during the Covid -19 crisis, the Courts must use technology as much as possible. While seeking to comply with Court Rules for the filing of documents and the creation of Court files, in particular Grand Court Rules (GCR) Order 63 Rules 2 and 3, already the Courts have introduced a form of e-filing by way of e-mails. While the Administration  works  towards  the  introduction  of  the permanent  e-filing  and  e-service platforms, many documents or categories of documents must now be received, by e-mail, processed and  authenticated electronically by the  use  of  e-signatures,  e-seals  and  e-stamps. To this end the administration has acquired a software called DigicertQuovadis which will be used to compile a database of authorised signatures, the Court seals and date stamps, for application to documents which must be authenticated by signature, seal or stamp. The software will be run on a dedicated on-site Court server where the documents will be kept after signing, sealing or stamping before filing and uploading to the Courts' JEMS or Criminal Registry platforms. The original code or  \\\"hash\\\"  for  each  signature,  seal  or  stamp  will  be stored  for  security  purposes, with Digicert-Quovadis for such time as deemed necessary, anticipated now to be six months. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Authorised signatures, seals and stamps must not be misapplied and so must be used only by those who are respectively authorised. To ensure this, access to the database will be encrypted and password-protected. It follows that specimen signatures will be required from each authorised signatory for the creation of individual hashes. Once this database of signatures, seals and stamps is compiled and secured they may  then  be used  for  the  authentication  of  documents  as  the  case  or situation may require. The overarching purpose is to administer the authentication and  record keeping  processes electronically without the  need  to  print  documents for  the  purpose  of  signing,  sealing  or stamping. Following are the Practice Directions for the Application of Authorised Signatures, Seals and Stamps. 1. Upon receipt of a document as an attachment to an email, the document will be downloaded to the dedicated server by the staff of the Registry to which it is directed. 2. The payment of fees contingent upon the filing of the document must be verified. 3. The document will then be forwarded to the authorised officer or signatory for processing. 4. For instance, if the document is a writ, plaint or other originating process, it will be initially reviewed and processed by Registry staff should the signature of the Clerk of Courts be required, then the document would be referred to the Clerk or  Deputy Clerk of  Court who will apply the e-signature as necessary. The Registry staff will affix the appropriate Court seal and date stamp, evidencing the official receipt of the document as a record of the Court. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 5. In keeping with GCR Order 63, Rule 2, the Clerk of Court  [or designate]  shall create an electronic Court file of every proceeding by assigning the Cause Number and by placing the writ, plaint or other originating pleading on the file  immediately  prior  to  issuing  the pleading by which the proceeding is commenced. 6. An electronic copy of the authenticated pleading will then be issued by return to the filer who will then be able to serve it on a respondent, with proof of service to come in the first instance electronically by affidavit. 7. Acknowledgements of service will also be accepted electronically, sealed and date stamped and placed upon the respective Court file. 8. In keeping with GCR Order 41 Rule 9 every affidavit used in a cause or matter proceeding in the Court must be filed. This must also be done electronically in the first instance. 9. The foregoing must be in keeping with GCR Order 63, Rule 3(1), which directs that every document required to be filed in any proceeding must be placed on the Court file relating to such proceeding and sealed with a seal showing the date upon which the document was filed. 10. In keeping with GCR Order 63 Rules 7 and 8, the Clerk of Courts shall place [or caused to be placed] a copy of every judgment, order, writ  or other  originating  process  upon  the registers of judgments, orders, writs and other originating process (unless otherwise ordered by the Court). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 11. If the document is a charge or indictment, it will be received by the Criminal Registry, sealed and stamped and a copy returned to the office of the DPP (ODPP). The criminal case file will be opened with the official document  and  where  appropriate  in  the  case  of  a  charge, summons , issued accordingly. See attached draft protocol to be agreed with the ODPP. 12. In keeping with GCR Order 42 if the document is a draft order or default judgment, it will be sealed and date stamped upon receipt electronically and sent to the respective Judge, Magistrate or to the Clerk of Court (as the case might be) for e-signing and return to the Registry. The date of the order or default judgment will then be inserted and the order placed on the respective Court file and register of orders and judgments. An electronic copy will then be returned to the filer (for service if necessary with the leave of the Court pursuant to GCR Order 65). 13. When finally approved and signed for issuance and publication, original judgments will, in keeping with GCR Order 42 rule 7(1) be placed upon the respective Court file. Electronic copies will be uploaded to the register of judgments and orders before being issued. When issued they will also be uploaded to the website (unless publication is embargoed by order of the Judge) 14. GCR Order 63 does require the creation and maintenance of hard copy file s and registers. Accordingly, until such time as the permanent efiling and e-service platforms become operational, and although documents received and processed in keeping with this Practice Direction will become records of the Court, the original hard copies are required to be filed with the Registry as soon as business returns to normal on a date to be announced. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 15. Protocols have for some time been in place for the e-filing of social inquiry reports and related documents by the Department of Community Rehabilitation and for the e-filing of tickets issued by the Department of Commerce and Investment. These are also attached. A new protocol for e-filing of reports by the Department of Children and Family Services will now be issued in the form also attached. 16. In relation to admissions pursuant to Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised), sections 3(1) and s.4 (1) and Practice Direction 4 of 2012, affidavits that are to be sworn before the Clerk of Court will be taken by Zoom appearance and thereafter the Court seal and esignature of the Clerk of Court can be affixed to the affidavit and provided to the filer electronically, and uploading to the Courts' JEMS or Civil Registry platform. 17.  Formatting: docments must be formatted as they would for conventional filing. 6 April 2020 (4 enclosures - Practice Directions 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D of 2020) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - FAMILY REGISTRY ELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES (DCFS) OBJECTIVE: To deliver reports, electronically to the Courts in respect of Summary and Grand Courts in order to facilitate timely receipt and accessibility by the judiciary, attorneys, parties and relevant agencies. JEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it allows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system to authorised users. BENEFITS: \u25ba To provide reports to the judiciary in advance of hearing. \u25ba To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with authorised access only. \u25ba To ensure faster response time in processing reports. \u25ba Reduce attendance of DCFS personnel at front counter filing reports. \u25ba Allow PA to print reports for judges or magistrates in advance of hearing. INDEX 1. Authority 2. Effective Date 3. Electronic Filing Case Types 4. Definitions 5. Method of Filing Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6. Privacy Issues 7. Format of Documents 8. System or User Errors 1. AUTHORITY Electronic filing of court reports is achieved by lodging reports electronically to the Family Proceedings Unit of Judicial Administration in accordance with Standards and Principles established by the Clerk of Court with the approval of the Chief Justice. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE The electronic filing of the reports described below is effective as of the 6th April 2020 until further notice. 3. ELECTRONIC FILING REPORT TYPES A. The Clerk of Court with the approval of the Chief Justice hereby authorises the filing electronically of the reports described in B below. From time-to-time, additional documents may be authorised to be processed in this way. Documents filed previously in the conventional manner will be scanned and included in the electronic case file. B. The following documents may be filed electronically: 1. Case Status Reports 2. Other reports from DCFS in r elation to Care Matters; 3. Domestic Violence cases, Family Cases, Divorce Matters, Adoption matters and Welfare Reports that relate to Summary Court, Civil Maintenance and Grand Court Civil matters. that relate to: (a) Summary Court (Civil) (b) Grand Court (civil - indictment) (c) Youth Court (civil) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (d) Drug Court 4. DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined as follows: A. Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents with the Civil\/ Family Registry. B. Electronic Document (\\\"e-document\\\") - An electronic file containing informational text. C. Electronic Filing (\\\"e-file\\\") - An electronic transmission of information between the Department and Judicial Administration. D. Electronic Image (\\\"e-image\\\") - An electronic representation of a document that has been transformed to a graphical or image format. E. Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all fonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document regardless of the application platform used. F.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the reports covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Civil Registry and Family Proceedings Unit (\u201cFPU\u201d) of the Judicial Administration, DCFS, the parties, the attorney acting in an individual case to which the report relates and any other relevant external agency. Other subscribers may be added by the Clerk of Court (after consultation with the DCFS) having regard for the protection of confidential information. 5. METHOD OF FILING \uf0d8 DCFS to e-file report to Judicial Administration through FTP Server by scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial administration system (this should be at least 36 working hours before the court hearing date). \uf0d8 In sending the scan, DCFS must include the proper case number (e.g. FAM 0001\/2014 or (for Summary Court) SMA0198\/2014 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (preceded by BC or BT for Brac Courts)) as part of the scanning reference entered into the machine from which the document is scanned: o Reports transmitted without a case number as the reference will be rejected. o Reports that do not contain on the first page clear reference to the case number and the hearing date will be rejected. \uf0d8 Civil Registry or Family Proceedings Unit staff will check the folder each working day before 9:00 am. and upload any report to JEMS with the e-sealing certification and date stamp (there is an accompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff). \uf0d8 Civil Registry\/Family Proceedings Unit staff will forward the report to the Judge\/Magistrate, any attorney identified in the JEMs records and\/or the parties themselves. \uf0d8 Civil Registry and Family Proceedings staff will create an e-record of the report, date stamp and e-seal and upload in JEMs, and place it in the court file. \uf0d8 Once in JEMS, reports can be viewed and printed (if needed) by PA to the Judge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate themselves). \uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the folder into which the report will be scanned in order to view reports not yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the court where it is sent after 9:00am) and to print them but must not delete the report from the folder. 6. PRIVACY ISSUES Since these reports contain personal information, they will be set up within JEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised personnel) (see 4F above). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7. FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS All uploaded reports created by word processing programs must be formatted as follows: (a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11 point font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognized as the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for those viewing the reports within JEMS); (b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font; (c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter); (d) the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm); (e) the top right 2\\\" x 2\\\" corner of the first page of each Report must be left blank  -  this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to be applied without concealing text; (f) each report must include: a. the hearing date, b. the parties' name, c. the case number, d. the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number of the person filing the report . The maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed documents is currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient for almost all reports. If a report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the report should contact the Supervisor of the Civil Registry or the Family Unit to decide how to proceed. If necessary a facility such as WeTransfer (wetransfer.com) may need to be used. 8. SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS Inevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration is committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 electronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in implementing this procedure. If a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS system or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Clerk of Court for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and IT Department. Unless exceptionally urgent, this should be a written description of the problem. If a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed under this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial Administration will be the Supervisor of the Civil Registry\/Family Proceedings Unit or, in their absence, the Senior Deputy Clerk of Court, Ms. Jenesha Simpson and for DCFS it will be the Senior DCFS Social Case Manager. Shiona Allenger Clerk of Court Issued by approval of the Chief Justice on 6 April 2020. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY ELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (ODPP) OBJECTIVE: To deliver documents for the Grand and Summary Courts (Criminal) electronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary. JEMS is the Judicial Administration\u2019s Electronic Management System; it allows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system to authorised users. BENEFITS: \uf0d8 To provide electronic documents to the judiciary in advance of hearing. \uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with authorised access only. \uf0d8 To ensure bundles are not misplaced and are always available. \uf0d8 Allow PA to print documents for judges in advance of hearing. INDEX 1. Authority 2. Effective Date 3. Electronic Filing Case Types 4. Definitions 5. Method of Filing 6. Privacy Issues 7. Format of Documents 8. System or User Errors Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1 AUTHORITY Electronic filing of Court documents is conducted by lodging documents with the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with Standards and Principles established by the Court Administrator with the approval of the Chief Justice. 2 EFFECTIVE DATE The Electronic filing of the documents described below is effective from the 1st May 2018 until further notice. 3 ELECTRONIC FILING DOCUMENT TYPES A.  The Court Administrator hereby authorises the filing electronically of the documents described in B below. From time-to-time, additional documents may be authorised to be processed in this way. B.  The following documents may be filed electronically: 1. Indictments 2. Charges 3. Trial Bundles (and NAEs) 4. Sentencing Bundles 5. Submissions Bundles 6. Other documents, as required that relate to: a. Grand Court (Criminal) b. Summary Courts (Criminal) 4 DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined as follows: A.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents with the Criminal Registry. B.  Electronic Document (\\\"e-document\\\") - An electronic file containing informational text. C.  Electronic Filing (\\\"e-file\\\") - An electronic transmission of information between the Department and Judicial Administration GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 D.  Electronic Image (\\\"e-image\\\") - An electronic representation of a document that has been transformed to a graphical or image format. E.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all fonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document regardless of the application platform used. F.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the reports covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Criminal Registry of the Judicial Administration and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution (ODPP). Other subscribers may be added by the Court Administrator (after consultation with the ODPP) having regard for the protection of confidential information. 5 METHOD OF FILING \uf0d8 ODPP to e-file report to Judicial Administration through SFTP or DropBox by scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial administration system. \uf0d8 In sending the scan, ODPP must include the proper case number (e.g. IND 0013\/2014) as part of the scanning reference entered into the machine from which the document is scanned; o Documents transmitted without a case number as the reference will be rejected. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day before 9am and upload any documents to JEMS (there is an accompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff. \uf0d8 If a document is urgent the document should be scanned in the normal manner and an email should be sent to the Deputy Clerk of Court and the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry as well as the PA to the Judge to ensure the document is accessed by the court. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will print the documents, date stamp it and place it in the Court file. \uf0d8 Once in JEMS, documents can be viewed and printed by PA to the Judge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate themselves). \uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the folder into which the report will be scanned in order to view Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 documents not yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the Court where it is sent after 9am) and to print them but must not delete the report from the folder. \uf0d8 Documents will be \u2018filed\u2019 at Court at the date and time the documents were sent to the FTP or DropBox. 6 PRIVACY ISSUES Since these reports contain personal information, they will be set up within JEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised personnel) (see 4F above). 7 FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS All uploaded reports created by word processing programs must be formatted as follows: (a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11 point font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognized as the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for those viewing the reports within JEMS); (b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font; (c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter); (d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm); (e)  the top right 2\\\" x 2\\\" corner of the first page of each Report must be left blank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to be applied without concealing text; (f)  each report must include: a.  the hearing date, b.  the defendant\u2019s name, c.  the case number , d.  the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number of the person filing the report. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8 SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS Inevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration is committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in implementing this procedure. If a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS system of the SFTP or DropBox process, it will be referred initially to ITALERTS at ITALERTS@Judicial.ky for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and IT Department. Unless exceptionally urgent, this should be a written description of the problem. If a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed under this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial Administration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or, in their absence, the Deputy Clerk of the Court and for ODPP it will be the Case Manager. Shiona Allenger Clerk of Court Issued by approval of the Chief Justice on Date Updated 21st May 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY ELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY REHABILITATION (DCR) OBJECTIVE: To deliver reports for the Summary and Grand Courts (Criminal) electronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary, prosecuting and defence attorneys and to staff of the relevant agencies. JEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it allows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system to authorised users. BENEFITS: \uf0d8 To provide reports to the judiciary in advance of hearing. \uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with authorised access only. \uf0d8 To ensure faster response time in processing reports. \uf0d8 Reduce attendance of DCR personnel at front counter filing reports. \uf0d8 Allow PA to print reports for judges or magistrates in advance of hearing. INDEX 1. Authority 2. Effective Date 3. Electronic Filing Case Types 4. Definitions 5. Method of Filing 6. Privacy Issues 7. Format of Documents GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8. System or User Errors 1. AUTHORITY Electronic filing of court reports is conducted by lodging reports with the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with Standards and Principles established by the Court Administrator with the approval of the Chief Justice. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE The Electronic filing of the reports described below is effective from the 1st July 2015 until further order. 3. ELECTRONIC FILING REPORT TYPES A.  The Court Administrator with the approval of the Chief Justice hereby authorises the filing electronically of the reports described in B below. From time to time, additional documents may be authorised to be processed in this way. Documents filed previously in the conventional manner will be scanned and included in the electronic case file. B. The following documents may be filed electronically: 1.  Social Inquiry Reports (SIRs) 2.  Case Status Reports (i.e. reports indicating that an SIR will not be available as ordered) 3.  Other reports from DCR relating to those appearing in the Drug Rehabilitation Court that relate to: (a)  Summary Court (Criminal) (b)  Grand Court (criminal \u2013 indictment) (c)  Youth Court (criminal) (d)  Drug Court Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined as follows: A.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents with the Criminal Registry. B.  Electronic Document (\\\"e-document\\\") - An electronic file containing informational text. C. Electronic Filing (\\\"e-file\\\") - An electronic transmission of information between the Department and Judicial Administration. D.  Electronic Image (\\\"e-image\\\") - An electronic representation of a document that has been transformed to a graphical or image format. E.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all fonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document regardless of the application platform used. F.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the reports covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Criminal Registry of the Judicial Administration, the defence attorney acting in an individual case to which the report relates and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). Other subscribers may be added by the Court Administrator (after consultation with the DCR) having regard for the protection of confidential information. 5. METHOD OF FILING \uf0d8 DCR to e-file report to Judicial Administration through FTP Server by scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial administration system (this should be at least 36 working hours before the court hearing date). \uf0d8 In sending the scan, DCR must include the proper case number (e.g. IND 0013\/2014 or (for summary court) 0198\/2014 (preceded by BC or BT for Brac Courts)) as part of the scanning reference entered into the machine from which the document is scanned: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 o Reports transmitted without a case number as the reference will be rejected. o Reports that do not contain on the first page clear reference to the case number and the hearing date will be rejected. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day before 9am and upload any report to JEMS (there is an accompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff). \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will forward the report to the ODPP and to any defence attorney identified in the JEMS record. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will seal and date stamp the Report electronically and place it in the JEMS court file. \uf0d8 Once in JEMS, Reports can be viewed and printed (if needed) by PA to the Judge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate themselves). \uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the folder into which the Report will be scanned in order to view reports not yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the court where it is sent after 9am) and to print them but must not delete the Report from the folder. 6. PRIVACY ISSUES Since these Reports contain personal information, they will be set up within JEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised personnel) (see 4F above). 7. FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS All uploaded Reports created by word processing programs must be formatted as follows: (a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11 point font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognised as the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for those viewing the reports within JEMS) (b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter); (d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm); (e)  the top right 2\\\" x 2\\\" corner of the first page of each Report must be left blank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to be applied without concealing text; (f)  each Report must include: a.  the hearing date, b.  the defendant\u2019s name, c.  the case number, d.  the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number of the person filing the Report. The maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed documents is currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient for almost all reports. If a Report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the Report should contact the Deputy Clerk of Court or the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry to decide how to proceed. If necessary a facility such as WeTransfer (wetransfer.com) may need to be used. 8. SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS Inevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration is committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in implementing this procedure. If a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS system or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Court Administrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and IT Manager (Andrew Doussept). Unless exceptionally urgent, this should be a written description of the problem. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 If a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed under this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial Administration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal registry or, in their absence, the Deputy Clerk of Court, Ms. Cecile Collins and for DCR it will be case manager assigned to the case. Kevin McCormac Court Administrator June 2015 Reissued on 6 April 2020 on direction of the Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY ELECTRONIC FILING OF TICKETS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE: To receive and register electronically delinquent ticketable offences from the Department of Commerce and Investment (DCI) within (48) forty-eight hours of every ticket that remains unpaid. JEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it allows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system to authorised users. BENEFITS: \uf0d8 Allow ticket to be viewed conveniently on JEMS. \uf0d8 To ensure timely receipt of tickets. \uf0d8 Reduce attendance of Field officers from DCI at front counter filing tickets. INDEX 1. Authority 2. Effective Date 3. Electronic Filing 4. Method of Filing 5. System or User Errors 1  AUTHORITY Electronic filing of DCI tickets is conducted by lodging tickets with the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 templates established by the Clerk of Courts with the approval of the ChiefJustice and the DCI. EFFECTIVE DATE The Electronic filing of the DCI tickets described below has been effective from the 1st September 2015 until further order. ELECTRONIC FILING A. The Clerk of Courts hereby authorises the filing electronically of tickets described in B below. From time to time, additional documents may be authorised to be processed in this way. Documents filed previously in the conventional manner will be scanned and included in the electronic case file. B. The following may be filed electronically: 1. Fixed penalties tickets 2. Summonses that relate to: (a) Summary Court METHOD OF FILING Method 1\u2014 Delinquent tickets \uf0d8 DCI to scan delinquent ticket and summons to Judicial Administration in accordance with the template through FTP Server by scanning the items in B above to a folder identified on the judicial administration system within (48) forty-eight hours. o The court has responsibility to schedule the tickets for mention on the following first available mention Tuesday. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check ticket folder each working day before 9am and print ticket for registration. \uf0d8 DCI ticket must include the date of birth (only if the ticket is in the name of a business, the date of birth will not be required). Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \uf0d8 As soon as practicable after receipt of a Delinquent ticket and summons, documents are to be registered into JEMS. \uf0d8 Upon registration a court date will be fixed and copy of ticket and summons will be provided to the Office of Public Prosecution. \uf0d8 A copy of the summons will also be issued to RCIPS for service on the company\/defendant. Method 2 \u2013 Not Guilty plea entered \uf0d8 Where a \u201cnot guilty\u201d plea is entered, the company or individual within 28 days must notify the Summary Court. o Notification by company or individual of not guilty plea should be scheduled by the Registry for the first mention Tuesday. \uf0d8 Ticket is registered and a Court date is provided to the Company or individual. Ticket and summons for Court date are sent to the Office of Public Prosecution. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check ticket folder each working day before 9am and upload any tickets to JEMS (there is an accompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff); \uf0d8 In sending the ticket, DCI ticket must include the date of birth (except of course if the ticket is in the name of a business, date of birth will not be required). Tickets will be rejected without a date of birth. \uf0d8 As soon as practicable after delinquent and \u201cnot guilty\u201d tickets are e-filed, tickets are to be entered in JEMS. \uf0d8 Delinquent tickets and \u201cnot guilty\u201d tickets after registration will be returned to DCI and ODPP by e-filing. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will print the ticket, date stamp it and create a file for the Court. 5  SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS Inevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration is committed to working with other subscribers to GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 maximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in implementing this procedure. If a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS system or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Court Administrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and IT Manager. Unless exceptionally urgent, there should be a written description of the problem. If a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed under this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial Administration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or, in their absence, the Deputy Clerk of Court. In the event that a problem arises that cannot be resolved immediately for a ticket to be e-filed, the DCI will revert to the submission of tickets by hand to the criminal registry but must call the criminal registry beforehand for an appointment. Kevin McCormac Court Administrator July 2015 Reissued as updated on 6 Apr 2020. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 CAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY ELECTRONIC FILING OF CHARGES REPORTS FROM THE ROYAL CAYMAN ISLANDS POLICE SERVICES (RCIPS) OBJECTIVE: To deliver documents for the Grand Court and Summary Court (Criminal) electronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary. JEMS is the Judicial Administration\u2019s Electronic Management System; it allows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system to authorised users. BENEFITS: \uf0d8 To provide electronic documents to the judiciary in advance of hearing. \uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with authorised access only. \uf0d8 To ensure charges are received before the bail dates. \uf0d8 To allow electronic signature by Justice of the Peace INDEX 1. Authority 2. Effective Date 3. Electronic Filing Case Types 4. Definitions 5. Method of Filing 6. Privacy Issues 7. Format of Documents 8. System or User Errors GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 1.  AUTHORITY Electronic filing of court documents is conducted by lodging documents with the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with Standards and Principles established by the Court Administrator with the approval of the Chief Justice. 2.  EFFECTIVE DATE The Electronic filing of the documents described below is effective from the May 21, 2020 until further order. 3.  ELECTRONIC FILING DOCUMENT TYPES A.  The Court Administrator hereby authorises the filing electronically of the documents described in B below. From time to time, additional documents may be authorised to be processed in this way. B.  The following documents may be filed electronically:- 1.  Charges\/indictments etc 2.  Summons 3.  Tickets 4.  Bail Bonds 5.  Summary of Facts 6.  Summonses 7.  Breach of bail report 8.  Executed warrant 9.  Summons to Medical Practitioner (Coroner) 10.  Other documents, as required. that relate to: \u2014 (a)  Grand Court (Criminal) (b)  Summary Court (Criminal) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (c)  Coroners Court (d)  Drug Rehabilitation Court (e)  Mental Health Court (f)  Special Domestic Violence Court (g)  Youth Court 4.  DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined as follows:- A.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents with the Criminal Registry. B.  Electronic Document (\\\"e-document\\\") - An electronic file containing informational text. C. Electronic Filing (\\\"e-file\\\") - An electronic transmission of information between the Department and Judicial Administration. D.  Electronic Image (\\\"e-image\\\") - An electronic representation of a document that has been transformed to a graphical or image format. F.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all fonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document regardless of the application platform used. G. Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the documents covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Criminal Registry of the Judicial Administration and the Royal Caymans Islands Police Service (RCIPS). Other subscribers may be added by the Court Administrator having regard for the protection of confidential information. 5.  METHOD OF FILING \uf0d8 RCIPS to e-file documents to Judicial Administration through SFTP or DropBox by sharing the documents to the appropriate folder identified on the SFTP or DropBox folder on the server of judicial administration system. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \uf0d8 In keeping with provisions of section 14(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised), charges must be duly signed by a police officer when filing by drop box and must be reviewed and signed by a Justice of the Peace, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 14(3) of the Law and shall also be read, as circumstances require. This completes the process of filing. \uf0d8 In sharing a charge document by an enforcement agency - 1. If a charge\/summons is filed the following must be specific: \u2022 If defendant is Agencies in Custody, bail or to be summonsed \u2022 Defendant\u2019s full name and physical address \u2022 Email address, if any (essential) \u2022 Contact number (essential) \u2022 Nationality 2. Other agencies filing documents must specify: \u2022 A case number on the document \u2022 Information set out in 5(1) above. The Case number must be visible to the user without having to open the document as part of the sharing reference entered into the SFTP or DropBox folder from which the document is uploaded; \uf0d8 Documents transmitted without an indication of a specific reference of bail, custody, summons and a signature will be rejected. \uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day before 9:00 am and upload any documents requiring signature to a Justice of the Peace. \uf0d8 If a document is urgent the document should not be shared in the normal way as stated above, an email marked \u201curgent\u201d should be sent to criminalregistry@judicial.ky to notify staff of the urgent court. Unless you provide an email notification the document may not be processed until after 3 p.m. \uf0d8 Documents sent to the Judicial server will be downloaded to apply the court seal and a Justice of the Peace signature as required on a charge document. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \uf0d8 Where a seal and signature has been applied, a JP\u2019s electronic signature, Criminal Registry staff will register the charge by giving a number. \uf0d8 The number for each charge filed will be provided in a JEMS filing report to accompany the charge document. \uf0d8 Agencies must apply the number to the charges as assigned in the report to the DPP SFTP or DropBox Folder of the appropriate agency and RCIPS SFTP or DropBox Folder along with the case number in the reference, the sealed file will trigger the creation of a court file, date stamp charge electronically with court seal according to the date received and place documents in the court\u2019s file pending hearing. \uf0d8 Once in JEMS, documents can be viewed and printed by staff with authorisation to view and print from JEMS. \uf0d8 To avoid duplicate uploading and printing of documents, only persons with access to the SFTP or DropBox folder will be allowed to print documents shared within the folder. Staff will archive documents from folder when uploaded within 14 days. \uf0d8 Documents uploaded by staff must be deleted from SFTP or DropBox immediately after uploading to avoid duplicate registration and uploading of documents. \uf0d8 Documents will be \u2018filed\u2019 and date stamped by court at the date and time the documents were sent to the SFTP or DropBox Folder on the Server. 6.  PRIVACY ISSUES Since these documents contain personal information, they will be set up within JEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised personnel) (see 4G above). 7.  FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS All uploaded documents created by word processing programs must be formatted as follows: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11 point font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognised as the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for those viewing the reports within JEMS) (b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font; (c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter); (d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm); (e)  the top right 2\\\"x 2\\\" corner of the first page of each Report must be left blank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to be applied without concealing text; (f)  each document must include: a.  the hearing date, if bailed b.  the defendant\u2019s full name, (First-middle-last) c.  Date of birth, d.  Nationality e.  Physical Address, f.  E-mail address and telephone number of the person filing the report g.  Offence(s) h.  Particulars of offence i.  Case number, if any The maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed documents is currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient for almost all reports. If a report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the report should contact the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or the Deputy Clerk of Court to decide how to proceed. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 8.  SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS Inevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration is committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in implementing this procedure. If a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the SFTP or DropBox process, it will be referred initially to the Court Administrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and IT Manager (Andrew Doussept). Unless exceptionally urgent, this should be a written description of the problem. If a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed under this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial Administration will be the Clerk of Court or a Deputy Clerk of Court. In their absence, the Supervisor of the Criminal registry at criminalregistry@judicial.ky and for RCIPs it will be the RCIPS at RCIPS.process@gov.ky. Suzanne Bothwell Court Administrator Issued by approval of the Chief Justice on May 21, 2020 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD REMOTE HEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE Introductory 1.  On March 28, 2020, the Chief Justice issued a Press Release entitled \u2018The Courts\u2019 response to the Shelter in Place Regulations\u2019: www.judicial.ky. In relation to the Financial Services Division (\u201cFSD\u201d), it was stated that: \u201c \u2022  In the FSD the use of video-conferencing and teleconferencing will be encouraged and implemented where possible. The practice is particularly well established in the FSD where Judges frequently preside over interlocutory proceedings in Court from the UK (and other places) by video-link. However, given the travel bans, it now seems likely that substantive trials will also have to be taken by these means as much as possible, even where the designated judge resides overseas. \u2022 And so, in keeping with Grand Court Rules Order 33 rule 1, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has confirmed, through the Office of the Governor that he consents to Grand Court judges presiding from the UK for trials in Cayman by way of video-link. Updated Practice Directions on Video-link Proceedings will be issued shortly. \u2022 Parties and their attorneys are advised to contact the FSD Registrar and\/or Listing Officer to identify those cases which must proceed by way of video-link and to confirm the arrangements with the designated Judges: bridget.myers@judicial.ky or yasmin.ebanks@judicial.ky. \u2022 Subject to the directions of the Judge in each case, the use of electronic bundles is especially encouraged at this time to reduce Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the need for photocopying and circumstances for the transmission of COVID-19.\u201d 2.  An important aspect of ensuring that more cases than usual can proceed through video conference hearings (\u201cVCR\u201d) and\/or on the papers is the availability of a mechanism for the electronic filing of cases without having to physically deliver documents to the Court. On 6 April 2020, the Chief Justice issued Practice Direction No. 2 of 2020: \u2018The Use of Electronic Signatures, Court Seals and Stamps\u2019. This may also be viewed on the Court\u2019s website: www.judicial.ky. 3.  The FSD Judges are available to hear cases remotely notwithstanding the current pandemic using VCR and applications on the papers as the norm rather than the exception. This will, where necessary, extend to trials as well as interlocutory applications. Traditional oral hearings in Court will remain the ideal form of hearing in many cases in which instance it is hoped that the parties will agree adjournments until the case may be orally heard in Court. While the Shelter in Place Regulations remain in force, the FSD will give priority to cases of urgency. As noted in the Chief Justice\u2019s 28 March 2020 Press Release reproduced in part above: \u201cParties and their attorneys are advised to contact the FSD Registrar and\/or Listing Officer to identify those cases which must proceed by way of video-link and to confirm the arrangements with the designated Judges: bridget.myers@judicial.ky or yasmin.ebanks@judicial.ky.\u201d 4.  This Practice Direction seeks to clarify the main ways in which the established FSD practice is likely to be modified, on a case by case basis, through the expanded use of remote hearings necessitated by the impracticability of conducting Court hearings as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Existing practice on remote hearings 5.  The Grand Court Rules regulate the circumstances in which hearings may be held outside the jurisdiction (O.32, r.28 applies to interlocutory hearings and O.33, r.1 applies to trials). These are supplemented by practice directions (see the Schedule below) and the FSD Users\u2019 Guide (see section B2.4 which is set out in the Schedule below). These FSD protocols for video-conference hearings (\u201cVCF\u201d), developed for parttime and full time non-resident judges and applications on the papers (set out in the Schedule hereto), provide a valuable platform for responding to the present crisis. The key elements of the existing regime which require explicit modification are: (a)  the requirement that the judge is participating from overseas; (b)  the restriction of the VCF regime to interlocutory applications; (c)  the requirement that an application for VCF will be made by a party as opposed to being initiated by the Court; (d)  the requirement that the parties should be physically present at a hearing in the Court. 6.  As far as the applications on the papers regime is concerned, the key elements of the existing regime which require explicit modification are: (a)  the assumption that an application for a hearing on the papers can only be made by a party as opposed to being proposed by the Court; (b)  the assumption that a hearing on the papers will only in exceptional circumstances be ordered absent the consent of both parties. Changing the existing practice on remote hearings: governing legal principles 7.  In considering what potential changes should be made to the existing regime, on a case by case basis, the following guiding principles in section 7 of the Bill of Rights (which is substantially based on article 6 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 of the European Convention on Human Rights) must always be borne in mind: (a)  every litigant has the fundamental right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time; (b)  the public may be excluded from proceedings where the Court is empowered by law to do so, inter alia, (1) where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice, and (2) in interlocutory proceedings. 8.  The Grand Court Act (as amended and revised) enables the Court to regulate its practice through its own rules (section 18(1)), but filling any gaps by reference to current English High Court practice. On March 25, 2020, the Master of the Rolls and the Lord Chancellor issued Practice Direction 51Y (PD) in relation to video and audio hearings during the Coronavirus pandemic. The UK Judiciary website (www.judiciary.uk\/announcments) describes the main objects of the modified practice in relation to remote hearings as follows: \uf0b7 clarify that the court may exercise the power to hold a remote hearing in private where it is not possible for the hearing to be simultaneously broadcast in a court building. It may do so consistently with the power to derogate from the principle of open justice and may do so under the provisions of this PD in addition to the bases for doing so set out in CPR 39.2. Where such an order is made under the PD the provisions in CPR 39.2(5) do not apply; \uf0b7 confirm that the court may not conduct a remote hearing in private where arrangements can be made for a member of the media to access the remote hearing. It makes clear that in such circumstances the court will be conducting the hearing in public; \uf0b7 clarifies that the court may direct that where it conducts a remote hearing in private, the court must, where it is practicable to do so, order that the hearing is recorded. Where GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 it has power to do so, it may order the hearing to be video recorded, otherwise where a recording is to be made it should be an audio recording. Available powers to order such hearings to be recorded, and subsequently broadcast, apply to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) through The Court of Appeal (Recording and Broadcasting) Order 2013 and are expected to apply more generally through s.85A of the Courts Act 2003, which is intended to be inserted by the Coronavirus Bill; \uf0b7 where a remote hearing is either audio or video recorded, any person may apply to the court for permission to access the recording.\u201d 9.  The English practice confirms that this Court should only have a nonpublic remote hearing where it is constitutionally permissible to have a private hearing, and that best efforts should be made to provide public access to any remote hearing either while it is taking place or by providing if possible a video recording afterwards. 10.  The overriding objective of the Grand Court Rules is that civil cases should be managed in a way which is designed to achieve, inter alia, the following objectives: \u201c(a)  ensuring that the substantive law is rendered effective and that it is carried out; (b)  ensuring that the normal advancement of the proceeding is facilitated rather than delayed; (c)  saving expense\u2026\u201d 11. GCR O.33, r.1 provides that the trial [regarded as distinct from an interlocutory hearing] of a cause or matter, or any question or issue arising therein, may take place outside the Cayman Islands where for some special reason the Court so orders and the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has certified that neither the Secretary of State nor the authorities in the country concerned have any objection to the Court Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 sitting in such country. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has confirmed that for the duration of the Coronavirus emergency the trial of any FSD cause or matter, or any question or issue arising therein, may take place in the United Kingdom. Remote hearings: the modified approach 12.  During the Coronavirus pandemic, and for so long as it is not possible to safely conduct in person hearings which would ordinarily be open to the public or for non-resident judges (and counsel who have obtained limited admission for the relevant application and matter) to travel to the Cayman Islands, FSD Judges may consider the appropriateness in light of the principles summarised above of: (a)  directing VCF hearings whether or not the Judge, the parties or counsel are in the jurisdiction or abroad; (b)  directing VCF hearings in respect of final and not just interlocutory matters, provided that appropriate safeguards to ensure public access to the hearing or a record of the hearing can be put in place (and where there is video link to the Court assigned to the matter the requirement for providing sufficient public access will usually be treated as having been satisfied); (c)  directing that an application which would typically be heard on the papers should be heard on that basis without both parties\u2019 consent, where it appears that substantive justice would be more undermined by delay than by directing that an oral hearing should take place. 13. The existing practice of the FSD in relation to the above matters and which are set out in the Schedule below shall continue to apply, subject to such modifications as may be required for any particular case. Any modifications will be guided by the principles set out above. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SCHEDULE: Current Practice Directions 1.  PD No, 1\/2010,1 which relates to hearings by telephone and by video link, provides at para.10: \uf0b7 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear summonses for directions and interlocutory applications by means of telephone or video conferences when they are off the Island and, pursuant to para 10.2 and paras 9.4 and 9.5, where a hearing takes place by way of a telephone conference call, the etiquette requires that all participating attorneys must be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge will be the last person to join the conference, whereupon he will ask all the participants to identify themselves. Telephone hearings may not be tape recorded without the consent of the Judge. If the Judge permits or directs that the hearing be tape recorded, he will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the Judge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a hearing is not tape recorded, the note taken or approved by the Judge will constitute the official record. 2.  PD2\/2012 also relates to interlocutory hearings (whether by telephone or by video link) by a Judge who is physically overseas (but see para B2.4 of the FSD Users Guide below for the usual practice nowadays): 1.  Introduction 1.1 This practice direction applies to all applications seeking the sanction of the Court for the use of video conferencing (VCF), 1.2 The purpose of this practice direction is to explain and clarify certain procedures and arrangements necessary in this relatively new method of taking evidence in trials or in other parts of any legal proceedings, for example, interim application case management conferences and pre-trial reviews. Further guidance 1 Revoked by PD 2 of 2013. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 is given in the Video Conferencing Guide appended to this practice direction. 1.3 VCF equipment may be used both (a) in a Courtroom, whether via equipment which is permanently placed there or via a mobile unit, and (b) in a separate studio or conference room. In either case, the location at which the Judge sits is referred to as the \\\"local site\\\". The other site or sites to and from which transmission is made are referred to as \\\"the remote site(s)\u201d and in any particular case any such site may be another Courtroom. 2.  Preliminary arrangements 2.1 The Court's permission is required for any part of the proceedings to be dealt with by means of VCF. Before seeking a direction, the applicant should notify the listing officer or other appropriate Court officer of the intention to seek it, and should enquire as to the availability of Court VCF equipment for the day or days of the proposed VCF. 2.2 The application for a direction should be made to any of the Judges of the Grand Court. If all parties consent to a direction, permission can be sought by letter, fax or e-mail, although the Court may still require an oral hearing. All parties are entitled to be heard on whether or not such a direction should be given and as to its terms. If a witness at a remote site is to give evidence by an interpreter, consideration should be given at this stage as to whether the interpreter should be at the local site or the remote site. 2.3 If a VCF direction is given, arrangements for the transmission will then need to be made. The Court will ordinarily direct that the party seeking permission to use VCF is to be responsible for this. That party is hereafter - in civil cases -referred to as \u2018the VCF arranging party\u2019. 2.4 .The VCF arranging party must contact the listing officer or other appropriate officer of the Court and make arrangements for the VCF transmission. Details of the remote site, and of the equipment GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 to be used both at the local site (if not being supplied by the Court) and the remote site (including the number of ISDN lines and connection speed), together with all necessary contact names and telephone numbers, will have to be provided to the listing officer or other Court officer. The Court will need to be satisfied that any equipment provided by the parties for use at the local site and that at the remote site is of sufficient quality for a satisfactory transmission. 3. Costs 3.1  Subject to any order to the contrary, all costs of the transmission, including the costs of hiring equipment and technical personnel to operate it, will initially be the responsibility of, and must be met by, the VCF arranging party. All reasonable efforts should be made to keep the transmission to a minimum and so keep the costs down. All such costs will be considered to be part of the costs of the proceedings and the Court will determine at such subsequent time as is convenient or appropriate who, as between the parties, should be responsible for them and (if appropriate) in what proportions. 4. Recording 4.1 The VCF arranging party must arrange for the recording equipment to be provided by the Court so that the evidence may be recorded at the local site. 4.2 Application for a direction from the Court must be made for the provision of recording equipment at the remote site by the arranging party. 4.3 No other recording may be made of any proceedings via VCF, save as directed by the Court. 3.  Paragraph B 2.4 of the FSD Users Guide provides as follows: (a)  Ideally an application for a proposed application to be heard by telephone or by video link should be made to the assigned Judge before he or she goes overseas so that all the relevant Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 considerations can be fully ventilated at an oral hearing in chambers. However, if that is not feasible in the circumstances, the request for a proposed application to be heard by telephone or by video link when the assigned Judge is already overseas will in practice usually be addressed in the first instance to the assigned Judge\u2019s PA, who will be in direct contact with the Judge and can most easily and quickly transmit the request direct to the Judge. The request should be supported by a letter from the applicant\u2019s attorney explaining in detail why the request is being made, whether the proposed application will be supported or opposed by any other party, why it is not possible or desirable to await the Judge\u2019s return, how much supporting documentation in the form of evidence, authorities etc. is involved and how long the hearing is likely to take. It is entirely a matter for the discretion of the assigned Judge whether to hear the application at all while off the Island and, if so, whether by telephone or by video link. All communications with the Judge must be made through the Judge\u2018s PA; no direct communication with the Judge is permitted. If the Judge agrees to hear the application by telephone or video link the applicant\u2018s attorney must liaise with the Judge\u2019s PA who will be responsible for all practical arrangements. (b)  In determining whether or not to hear a proposed application by telephone or video link the assigned Judge will usually consider whether the proposed application is sufficiently urgent and important to justify the time, inconvenience and cost of it being heard by telephone or video link. The Judge will also take into account how long the hearing is likely to take and how long it will be before he or she would be able to hear the application on Island. (c)  The assigned Judge will usually only agree to hear an application by telephone if it is relatively straightforward, not GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 highly contested and will not last more than a maximum 2 hours unless there are special circumstances. (d)  An application for a witness to be allowed to give evidence by video link, whether in a hearing when the Judge is overseas or in a hearing or trial when the Judge is not overseas, will usually only be granted in very exceptional circumstances. Unless the proposed evidence of the witness is purely formal and will not involve any significant cross-examination, the Court will be very reluctant to grant such an application. Amongst other things, there will be concerns as to the Judge\u2018s ability to satisfactorily assess the witness\u2018s demeanour, objectivity and reliability over a video link and the ability to ensure that no one else is present unseen with the witness who may be able to prompt the witness. Such concerns will be exacerbated if the witness requires an interpreter. The strong preference of the Court is to see and hear the evidence of a witness in person. (e) The current video conferencing guide is set out on the next page. 4.  The Video Conferencing Guide currently set out in the FSD Users\u2019 Guide provides as follows: VIDEO CONFERENCING GUIDE This guidance is for the use of video conferencing (VCF) in civil proceedings. It is in part based upon the protocol of the Federal Court of Australia and CPR 32 Practice Direction of the Courts of England and Wales. It is intended to provide a guide to all persons involved in the use of VCF, although it does not attempt to cover all the practical questions which might arise. VIDEO CONFERENCING GENERALLY 1.  VCF may be a convenient way of dealing with any part of proceedings: it can involve considerable savings in time and cost. Its use for the taking of evidence from overseas witnesses will, in Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 particular, be likely to achieve a material saving of costs. It is, however, inevitably not as ideal as having the witness physically present in Court. Its convenience should not therefore be allowed to dictate its use. A judgment must be made in every case in which the use of VCF is being considered not only as to whether it will achieve an overall cost saving but as to whether its use will be likely to be beneficial to the efficient, fair and economic disposal of the litigation. In particular, it needs to be recognised that the degree of control a Court can exercise over a witness at the remote site is or may be more limited than it can exercise over a witness physically before it. 2.  When used for the taking of evidence, the objective should be to make the VCF session as close as possible to the usual practice in a trial Court where evidence is taken in open Court. To gain the maximum benefit, several differences have to be taken into account. Some matters, which are taken for granted when evidence is taken in the conventional way, take on a different dimension when it is taken by VCF: for example, the administration of the oath, ensuring that the witness understands who is at the local site and what their various roles are, the raising of any objections to the evidence and the use of documents. 3.  It should not be presumed that all foreign governments are willing to allow their nationals or others within their jurisdiction to be examined before a Court by means of VCF. If there is any doubt about this, enquiries should be directed to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (International Legal Matters Unit, Consular Division) with a view to ensuring that the country from which the evidence is to be taken raises no objection to it at diplomatic level. The party who is directed to be responsible for arranging the VCF (see paragraph 8 below) will be required to make all necessary inquiries about this well in advance of the VCF and must be able to inform the Court what those inquiries were and of their outcome. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 4. Time zone differences need to be considered when a witness abroad is to be examined in the Cayman Islands by VCF. The convenience of the witness, the parties, their representatives and the Court must all be taken into account. The cost of the use of a commercial studio is usually greater outside normal business hours. 5. Those involved with VCF need to be aware that, even with the most advanced systems currently available, there are the briefest of delays between the receipt of the picture and that of the accompanying sound. If due allowance is not made for this, there will be a tendency to \u2018speak over\u2019 the witness, whose voice will continue to be heard for a millisecond or so after he or she appears on the screen to have finished speaking. 6. With current technology, picture quality is good, but not as good as a television picture. The quality of the picture is enhanced if those appearing on VCF monitors keep their movements to a minimum. PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS 7.  The VCF arranging party must ensure that an appropriate person will be present at the local site to supervise the operation of the VCF throughout the transmission in order to deal with any technical problems. 8.  It is recommended that the Judge, practitioners and witness should arrive at their respective VCF sites about 20 minutes prior to the scheduled commencement of the transmission. 9.  If the local site is not a Courtroom, but a conference room or studio, the Judge will need to determine who is to sit where. The VCF arranging party must take care to ensure that the number of microphones is adequate for the speakers and that the panning of the camera for the practitioners' table encompasses all legal representatives so that the viewer can see everyone seated there. 10.  The proceedings, wherever they may take place, form part of a trial to which the public is entitled to have access (unless the Court has Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 determined that they should be heard in private). If the local site is to be a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party must ensure that it provides sufficient accommodation to enable a reasonable number of members of the public to attend. 11. In cases where the local site is a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party should make arrangements, if practicable, for the Royal Coat of Arms to be placed above the Judge's seat. 12. In cases in which the VCF is to be used for the taking of evidence, the VCF arranging party must arrange for recording equipment to be provided by the Court which made the VCF direction so that the evidence can be recorded. An associate will normally be present to operate the recording equipment when the local site is a Courtroom. The VCF arranging party should take steps to ensure that an associate is present to do likewise when it is a studio or conference room. The equipment should be set up and tested before the VCF transmission. It will often be a valuable safeguard for the VCF arranging party also to arrange for the provision of recording equipment at the remote site. This will provide a useful back-up if there is any reduction in sound quality during the transmission. A direction from the Court for the making of such a back-up recording must, however, be obtained first. This is because the proceedings are Court proceedings and, save as directed by the Court, no other recording of them must be made. The Court will direct what is to happen to the back-up recording. 13. Some countries may require that any oath or affirmation to be taken by a witness accord with local custom rather than the usual form of oath or affirmation used in the Cayman Islands. The VCF arranging party must make all appropriate prior inquiries and put in place all arrangements necessary to enable the oath or affirmation to be taken in accordance with any local custom. That party must be in a position to inform the Court what those inquiries were, what their outcome was and what arrangements have been made. If the oath or affirmation can be administered in GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 the manner normal in the Cayman Islands, the VCF arranging party must arrange in advance to have the appropriate holy book at the remote site. The associate will normally deliver the oath. 14. Consideration will need to be given in advance to the documents to which the witness is likely to be referred. The parties should endeavour to agree on this. It will usually be most convenient for a bundle of the copy documents to be prepared in advance, which the VCF arranging party should then send to the remote site. 15. Additional documents are sometimes quite properly introduced during the course of a witness's evidence. To cater for this, the VCF arranging party should ensure that equipment is available to enable documents to be transmitted between sites during the course of the VCF transmission, Consideration should be given to whether to use a document camera. If it is decided to use one, arrangements for its use will need to be established in advance. The panel operator will need to know the number and size of documents or objects if their images are to be sent by document camera. In many cases, a simpler and sufficient alternative will be to ensure that there are fax transmission and reception facilities at the participating sites. THE HEARING 16. The procedure for conducting the transmission will be determined by the Judge. The Judge will determine who is to control the cameras. In cases where the VCF is being used for an application in the course of the proceedings, the Judge will ordinarily not enter the local site until both sites are on line. Similarly, at the conclusion of the hearing, he will ordinarily leave the local site while both sites are still on line. The following paragraphs apply primarily to cases where the VCF is being used for the taking of the evidence of a witness at a remote site. In all cases, the Judge will need to decide whether Court dress is appropriate when using VCF facilities. It might be appropriate when transmitting from Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Courtroom to Courtroom. It might not be when a commercial facility is being used. 17. At the beginning of the transmission, the Judge will probably wish to introduce themselves and the advocates to the witness. That Judge will probably want to know who is at the remote site and will invite the witness to introduce themselves and anyone else who is with that witness. The Judge may wish to give directions as to the seating arrangements at the remote site so that those present are visible at the local site during the taking of the evidence. The Judge will probably wish to explain to the witness the methods of taking the oath or of affirming, the manner in which the evidence will be taken, and who will be conducting the examination and cross-examination. The Judge will probably also wish to inform the witness of the matters referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 above (co-ordination of picture with sound, and picture quality). 18. The examination of the witness at the remote site should follow as closely as possible the practice adopted when a witness is in the Courtroom. During examination, cross-examination and reexamination, the witness must be able to see the legal representative asking the question, and also any other person (whether another legal representative or the Judge) making any statements in regard to the witness's evidence. It will in practice be most convenient if everyone remains seated throughout the transmission. 5.  The FSD Users\u2019 Guide also makes the following provision for applications on the papers: B1.1 APPLICATIONS \u2015ON THE PAPERS B1.1(a)Although contested applications are usually best determined at an oral hearing, some applications may, in the discretion of the Judge, be suitablefor determination on the papers without the need for an oral hearing. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 B1.1(b)If the applicant considers that the application may be suitable for determination on the papers, the applicant should ensure before filing the papers that: (i)  the application, together with any supporting evidence, has been served on the defendant\/respondent (if any); (ii) the defendant\/respondent (if any) has been allowed the appropriate period of time in which to serve evidence in opposition; (iii) any evidence in reply has been served on the defendant\/respondent (if any); and (iv) there is included in the papers the written consent of the defendant\/respondent (if any) to the disposal of the application on the papers without an oral hearing. B1.1(c) An application to be disposed of on the papers will not require a summons. There should however be a supporting letter from the applicant\u2018s attorney. B1.1(d) Only in the most exceptional cases will the Court dispose of an application on the papers in the absence of the consent of the defendant\/respondent (if any) to the Court doing so. If an application is or is likely to be opposed the Court will usually require an oral hearing, in which case the applicant should file and serve a summons in the usual way B1.1(e) The Applicant must submit a draft proposed order with the papers. The draft proposed order must expressly state that the Judge considers the application to be suitable to be disposed of on the papers without the need for an oral hearing. B1.1(f) Any application for an interim injunction or similar remedy will normally require an oral hearing. Hon Anthony Smellie Chief Justice 9 April 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF FINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD HEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE Introductory 1. This Practice Direction is further to Practice Direction No. 6 of 2020 'Modifying Standard Remote Hearing Practice During Corona virus Pandemic Until Further Notice' issued by the Chief Justice on 9 April 2020. 2. Practice Direction No. 6 addressed the increased use of remote hearings and how the pre-existing practice will be modified. The present Practice Direction addresses the length of hearings and special accommodations for counsel and seeks to introduce a uniform approach in relation to hearings taking place in the Cayman Islands and significantly increased number of cases involving FSD Judges presiding by video-link from London. 3. Notwithstanding the latest changes to the Shelter-in-Place Regulations (SL 43 of 2020) which allow parties and their lawyers to attend court to fulfil legal obligations, because Government's social distancing policies are likely to remain in place for the immediate future, remote hearings will continue to take place unless there is a compelling reason for a hearing to take place in Court. Sitting times 4. A full day hearing will generally last no longer than 4 hours and a half-day hearing no longer than 2 hours. Subject of course to modification as the interests of justice may require, the standard Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 sitting hours for hearings lasting one or more full days will be as follows (all times are Cayman Islands time): \u2022 8.30am-10.30 am:\u00bd day \u2022 10.30-11.00 am: break \u2022 11.00am-l.00pm: \u00bd day. Special accommodations for counsel 5. Counsel may be presented with extenuating personal circumstances arising out of the Coronavirus Pandemic which impact on their availability for scheduled hearings. FSD Judges will be sensitive to the importance of confidentiality and will seek to make special accommodations for counsel, where the interests of justice will not be compromised, without requiring full particulars to be given of the matters concerned. 5 May 2020 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020 Sittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of videoconference (Issued by the Chief Justice pursuant to section 95(7)(d) of the Cayman Islands Constitution Order 2009 and section 5 of the Court of Appeal Law, in consultation with and by approval of the President of the Court of Appeal). Sittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of video-conference in response to the Public Health (Prevention, Control and Suppression of COVID-19) (Amendment) Regulations, 2020 [\u201cthe Regulations\u201d]. In a Press Release by the Chief Justice on 28 March 2020 it was stated among other things that: \u201cAs a result of the prevailing travel restrictions, the President and Justices of Appeal will not be travelling to preside in Court in Cayman for the upcoming April-May session [Spring Session]. However, video-conference arrangements are being made to allow the Court to be convened with the President and Justices presiding from the United Kingdom. The List of appeals to be taken will likely be reduced because of the circumstances. Parties and\/or their attorneys should contact the Registrar of the Court of Appeal for the confirmation of listings at 244-3808 or by e- mail to: Jenesha.Simpson@judicial.ky.\\\" The List of Appeals having been settled and published on 11 April 2020, following are directions for the conduct of the various hearings by way of video-conference. 1. The President and Justices of Appeal will appear and preside together in Court 6 or Court 1 (as the cases may require) where the Court of Appeal will be convened by video-links from the United Kingdom. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Except for 29 and 30 April when criminal appeals will commence at 10am, time zone differences will require that proceedings commencing at 8am, local time. The Registrar and IT Technician will be present in the Courtroom where they will provide necessary administrative and technical support to the Court. Except in family matters, the proceedings will be in open court and deemed public proceedings. However, in keeping with the need for social distancing as mandated by the Regulations, the physical attendance of persons will not be allowed.  Instead the proceedings will be streamed live from the Courtroom via the website: www.judicial.ky. Members of the public and the Press may hear and view the proceedings by connecting to the link displayed on the home page. The proceedings will be streamed live and a recording will be available through the website link for 30 days after the conclusion of the Spring Session. It may be necessary from time to time for there to be breaks in transmission to prevent the publication of prejudicial evidence or statements but only as the Court may deem strictly necessary. Participation in the proceedings will be by password and dial-in access. Parties and their attorneys must obtain these details from the Registrar beforehand. 2. Criminal Appeals Subject to the directions of the Court as the case may require, Appellants will appear before the Court and participate by way of video-link. Their attorneys may appear in person or by way of videolink. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 The technology will allow for Appellants and their attorneys to consult in private with the leave of the Court by way of \u201cbreak out rooms\u201d. Counsel for the Crown may appear in person or by way of video-link. 3. Family appeals. The family appeal B.J v D.J listed for 4 and 5 May 2020 will proceed in camera, pursuant to section 5 of the Court of Appeal Act (as amended and revised) and in keeping with the private and sensitive nature of such matters. The parties and their attorneys will appear by way of video-link except with the leave of the Court limited to one party and one attorney on each side appearing in person. 4. Civil appeals. The parties and their attorneys will appear by way of video-link except with the leave of Court limited to one party and one attorney on each side appearing in person. 5. The proceedings will be recorded via ZOOM or in such other manner as the Court might direct. On the application of any person, any recording so made is to be accessed by application to the Registrar, with the consent of the Court. 13 April 2020. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020 PUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS BY AUDIO OR VIDEO LINKS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC Open justice is a fundamental principle in our court systems, and will continue to be so as we increase the use of audio and video technology in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In considering the use of telephone and video technology, the judiciary will have regard to the principles of open justice, as they do now. As they do now, judges (including the magistrates), may determine that a hearing should be held in private if this is necessary to secure the proper administration of justice. In particular, recognising the sensitivities of such cases, the usual practice in family and Children Act (as amended and revised) proceedings will be to not broadcast those proceedings and in Criminal proceedings the broadcast may be suspended to prevent transmission to subsequent witnesses. However, a range of measures will continue to support the principle of open justice: \u2022 Access to open hearings by way of live-streaming if and where a public gallery is available at which the integrity of the proceedings can be safeguarded, or a third party such as a member of the press may join the hearing remotely by password access. For the time being live-streaming of proceedings, will be done to the Town Hall, \\\"Constitution Hall\\\", George Town, where members of the public may have access for observation only, subject to social distancing protocols. \u2022 Transcripts of hearings in those courts where they are available, now. Any party or interested person is able to request a transcript. Judges may direct that the transcript be made available at public expense where appropriate and public access to transcripts, notes or other information relating to court proceedings will, of course, be in keeping with applicable law and court rules. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \u2022 With the permission of the judge, an audio recording of a hearing can be made available to be listened to in a court building. \u2022 With the permission of the judge, in courts where this is already done, the notes of the hearing can be made available on request. \u2022 Publication of the outcome of Grand Court and Court of Appeal hearings, or orders or results will continue to be available, in most instances online. \u2022 Access to hearings and information will be available to accredited media, such as the provision of listings and results information in Magistrates' Courts on the website at www.Judicial.ky or via email if requested. \u2022 Where parties or the press are allowed to observe a hearing remotely they are reminded that it will be a contempt of court to make unauthorised recordings of the proceedings or to use or to allow the use of such recordings to interfere with the administration of justice. Where proceedings are being broadcasted, a note will be included in the course of the streaming at the bottom of the screen to this effect: \\\"This is a formal court proceeding in respect of which the usual rules as set out in Practice Direction 1 of 2014 (attached) will apply. No photographs, filming or recordings may be made except with the approval of the Court. Requests from the media and others to observe a hearing remotely should be made to the court in advance to allow for inclusion during the hearing set-up. (Enclosure: Practice Direction 1 of 2014) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020 GUIDANCE FOR THE REMOTE NOTARISATION AND ATTESTATION OF DOCUMENTS BY ELECTRONIC MEANS 1. These Practice Directions shall be read in conjunction with the Notaries Public Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"the Law\\\") and the Notaries Public (Virtual Conduct of Notarial Acts) Regulations (as amended and revised), (\\\"the Regulations\\\") made by Cabinet on 17th April 2020 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 of the Law and shall also be read, as circumstances require, in conjunction with the Justices of the Peace Regulations, 2015,1 including the Schedule thereto. 2. These Directions are primarily intended to allow notarial and Justices of the Peace (\\\"JP\\\") attestation services to continue to be provided for the purposes of court proceedings whilst observing the COVID-19 Shelter-in-Place Regulations. However, they will, where necessary, continue to allow such services to be provided remotely after the lifting of the Shelter-in -Place Regulations. 3. Conditions for conduct of notarial acts by use of communication technology Where any act by a notary public allowed by the Law is to be carried out virtually by use of communication technology (as defined by the Regulations), the following conditions shall apply \u2014 (a) the remotely located individual seeking notarial services (\\\"the individual\\\" ) must demonstrate that that individual is physically situated in the Islands ; (b) the individual shall transmit to the notary public via facsimile, email or other electronic means, a legible copy of the relevant document in relation to which notarial acts are to be performed ; 1 Made under the Summary Jurisdiction Law (2006 Revision). GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (c) the notary public may, after observing the signature or requisite act of the individual, notarise the transmitted copy of the document and return it via facsimile, email or other electronic means; (d) the notary public shall record the details of the notarial act performed in the Notarial Acts Book in accordance with Section 13 of the Law and in so doing shall indi cate that the notarial act was performed in accordance with the Regulations; (e) where the individual is not personally known to the notary public, the individual shall present valid photo identification to the notary public during the real time transmission interaction. 4. Recording of notarial act A notary public who uses communication technology to \u2014 (a) administer an oath shall record, or cause to be recorded, the performance of that notarial act; (b) perform an act (other than the act of administering an oath) required to be performed by a notary public under any law including the provisions of any treaty or convention and any protocol to such treaty or convention that is applicable to the Islands may, upon prior notification of the individual, record, or cause to be recorded, the performance of the act. 5. Filing of notarial certificate with the Court (a) Where required for the purposes of filing with the Court, a notarial certificate must disclose that the notarisation was conducted using communication technology. (b) The document so certified may then be filed by the individual by email with the Court and accepted as a duly sworn document for court related purposes. (c) The individual will be required to provide an undertaking to the Court that the original document will be filed once the Court reopens to the public. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6. Justices of the Peace The procedures set out above are also to be observed, mutatis mutandis, as they relate to att estations by Justices of the Peace. And, in part icular, Justices of the Peace shall keep a written record of any attestation by use of communication technology which is to be filed with the court, in compliance with Regulation 12 of the Justices of the Peace Regulations, 2015. 5 May 2020 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020 1. DRAWING UP AND FILING OF JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS 2. FORM OF ORDERS MADE BY THE COURT APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT OR WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES 3. PROVISION OF ORDERS OF THE COURT BY THE CLERK OF COURT Preamble This Practice Direction is to be read in conjunction with Grand Court Rules Order 42, rules 5 and 5A as those rules relate respectively to the provision of orders, filed with the Court, by the Clerk of Court; to the drawing up and filing of judgments and orders; and to the form and contents of orders of the Court made with the consent of the parties to a cause or matter. Drawing up and filing of Judgments and Orders (GCR. 0.42, r. 5 and r.5A) 1. GCR Order 42, r. 5 deals with the drawing up and filing of orders. Rule 5(5) provides that the attorney for the successful party shall draw up the order and circulate it to the attorneys for the other parties who shall endorse it ''approved as to form and content\\\". Paragraphs (6) and (7) then provide what is to be done by the Clerk of the Court upon receipt of a draft order depending upon whether it complies with paragraphs (6) or (7) or rule 5A. In keeping with these rules the following practice shall apply: (i) Every judgment or order should be dated with the date upon which it is made. A judgment or order is made when the judge pronounces it. (ii) The attorney responsible for drawing up a judgment or order should include the date upon which it was made in the draft Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 which is presented for signature. Unsigned draft orders must not be sealed. (iii) The date upon which a judgment or order is filed in the Registry should be the date upon which it is signed. After having been signed the judgment or order will be sealed with the respective Court seal and the date of filing will be inserted either by the judge or a Court Registry official. 2. Form and content of orders made by the Court approved as to form and content by the parties or with the consent of the parties (GCR. 0. 42, r.5(5) or r.5A(3). Orders encompassed by these rules should be in the following format: Under the style of cause: \\\"IN CHAMBERS\/IN OPEN COURT\/RESPECTIVE DIVISION DATE OF ORDER BEFORE HON. JUSTICE ORDER   or ORDER BY CONSENT OF THE PARTIES (as the case may be) UPON hearing counsel for the applicant etc. IT IS  HEREBY ORDERED THAT: DATED the FILED the JUDGE OF THE GRAND COURT or    CLERK OF THE COURT (as the case may be) And on a separate page, not forming part of the Order, with signatures as required: \u201cApproved as to form and content by the Parties\u201d OR GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \u201cBy consent of the parties\u201d (as the case may be) 3. Order 42 r.5(8) provides: \\\"The Clerk of the Court shall notify the party who drew up the judgment or order when it has been filed and shall provide such party with as many sealed copies as he may require upon payment of the prescribed fee.\\\" The obligation of the Clerk of the Court is to notify the successful party (through that successful party\u2019s attorney), who drew up the draft order, that the order has been filed and to provide copies to that attorney. There is no requirement to notify and\/or supply copies to other parties. However, in light of the Court of Appeal's recent pronouncement in H.E.B. Enterprises Limited et al v Bernice Richards (as PR of Estate of Anthony Richards Deceased) Judgment delivered 21 September 2020, this practice should be enhanced and the practice will accordingly be as follows: The Clerk of the Court shall supply copies of sealed orders to the attorneys of all parties (or to any party acting in person) rather than just to the party who has submitted the draft order. 4. Practice Direction No.2 of 1999 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2006 are hereby repealed and replaced. Made this 29th Day of September 2020. Hon Anthony Smellie Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 ELECTRONIC FILING (E-FILING) AND E-SERVICE IN THE GRAND COURT OF DOCUMENTS VIA THE JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION EFILING PLATFORM 1. Authority 1.1. This Practice Direction is made by the Chief Justice pursuant to Order 1, Rule 12(1) of the Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) (\\\"the GCR\\\"). 2. Commencement 2.1. This Practice Direction will come into effect on 8th January 2021. 3. Introduction 3.1. In furtherance of the objectives of GCR Order 63 Rule 3 and Order 5 Rules 1(5) and (6) this Practice Direction provides for the filing and service of documents (\\\"e- filing and e-service\\\") by electronic means. The introduction of an electronic means of filing and service of documents will improve access to justice by increasing efficiencies, timeliness and reducing costs. 3.2. This Practice Direction applies to all existing cases as well as new cases commenced on or after January 8, 2021 and can be used to file documents to commence or continue cases that are already before the Court. 3.3. The filing of documents by electronic means must be done in accordance with this Practice Direction. 4. Operation of Electronic filing system 4.1. The Judicial Administration has acquired an e-filing platform (\\\"APEX CURIA\\\" the \\\"Platform\\\"). The Platform may be accessed via an internet Portal on the Judicial Website (\\\"www.judicial.ky\\\"). 4.2. The Platform enables parties to issue proceedings and file documents online to the Civil (in all Divisions) and Criminal Registries of the Courts at any time during or outside normal Court Office opening hours including weekends, public holidays and during Court breaks. 5. Electronic Submission of Documents 5.1. In order to file documents using the Platform, a party must \u2014 a. Access the Portal by visiting the Judicial Administration website at www.judicial.ky and clicking on the link to the e-filing Portal; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 b. Register a new account or log into an existing account in the fields of data required by the Platform. a. Enter details of a new case or an existing case as required by the fields of data of the Platform; b. Upload the document(s) associated with that case; c. Pay the appropriate fee online by way of the e-filing Portal; and d. Submit the document(s). 6. Format of Documents 6.1. A document to be filed by electronic means must be submitted in a format supported by the software of the Platform and so in keeping with the following directions. 6.2. Documents submitted electronically must not be password protected and must be: \u2014 a. Prepared electronically using MS Word or open office or any other Word Processor in .doc, .dox, .txt, .rtf, .pdf formats: and b. Converted into Portable Document Format (PDF) before uploading. 6.3. Where the document is not a text document, the document must be scanned using an image resolution of 300 dpi (dots per inch) and saved as a PDF document. 6.4. Documents submitted through the e-filing Portal must comply with the requirements specified in the GCR Order 66 and explained in the Explanatory Memorandum thereof (as amended and revised) Paragraph 16, sub-paragraph 16.2 which sets out the following: \u2014 Paper size: letter size of approximately 11 inches (28 cm) long by 8.5 inches (21.5 cm) wide Margins: 1.5 inches (3.5 cm) at top and bottom 1.5 inches (3.5 cm) at the left side 1 inch (2.5 cm) at the right side 6.5. The aggregate size of a document cannot exceed 100 MB (megabytes) for one submission. 6.6. Where the aggregate size of a document exceeds 100 MB (megabytes) that large document must be separated into multiple smaller documents not exceeding 100 MB ((megabytes) each. Thereafter, each document must be submitted as one part of the whole, e.g., - \\\"part 1 of 3\\\", \\\"part 2 of 3, \\\"part 3 of 3\\\" and so on. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6.7. Exhibits must be uploaded and submitted separately from the corresponding principal document but identified as related to it. 6.8. Each exhibit must be uploaded and identified separately, e.g., - \\\"exhibit one Contract\\\", \\\"exhibit two cheque\\\", \\\"exhibit three Certificate of title\\\", and so on. 7. Identity of Party Filing Documents (GCR O.63 r.5) 7.1. Every document filed in, or process issued out of the Court Office shall identify the filing party in keeping with the requirements of GCR Order 63, Rule 5 and as required by the Platform. 8. Electronic Signatures 8.1. The Platform supports the use of electronic signatures on documents subscribed by the registered filing party. A document which requires signature must be signed when submitted for filing by electronic means and must be an electronic copy of the original signed document. A document which requires attestation must be attested to when submitted for filing by electronic means and must be an electronic copy of the original attested document. 8.2. Where parties file documents using the Platform, all original documents filed electronically must be made available for inspection if required by another party to the proceedings and\/or by order of the Court. 9. Filing outside business hours 9.1. Any document submitted through the Platform for filing outside business hours (8:30 am to 5:00 pm Mondays to Fridays) or on a public holiday, Saturday, or Sunday, or any other period during which the Registry is closed, will be deemed filed as soon as the Registry is next open. 9.2. Documents will be ascribed times of e-filing and if for any reason the Platform becomes non-operational the time of filing will be regarded as the time ascribed when the document was filed rather than when the process of filing was completed. 10. Fees 10.1. The prescribed fees set out in the Court Fee Rules  (as amended and revised) are payable for all documents filed electronically as they would be for documents filed non- electronically and at the time of filing, whereupon a receipt from the Clerk of Court will be generated through the online payment system. 11. Processing by the Registry 11.1. The Registry will review all documents submitted for filing for compliance with the Grand Court Rules (\\\"GCR\\\") and this Practice Direction. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 a. Where a document has been submitted using the Platform, an automated notification will be generated which will appear in the message centre of the account registered to the filing party and also sent to that party by email. b. A document submitted using the Platform that complies with the GCR and this Practice Direction shall be filed. A document submitted for filing that does not comply with the GCR and this Practice Direction shall not be filed and a notice of the reasons for non- acceptance shall be sent to the message centre of the filing party and by email to that party with a notice of the reason(s) for non-acceptance. The document may be amended and resubmitted for filing accordingly. c. Each filed document shall be stamped, dated and paginated sequentially based on the case number under which the document is filed or based on the case number that is assigned to the document if the document filed commences a new case. d. An electronic certificate will be applied to all documents accepted by the registry for filing. The electronic certificate validates the authenticity of the document as being duly filed in the Registry. e. Once a document has been duly filed in the Registry, an automated notification will be generated which will appear in the message centre of the account registered to the filing party and will also be sent by email, as the case may be, to the filing party to confirm that the document has been filed and to confirm the date and time of filing. f. Once a document has been duly filed in the Registry, copies will be generated electronically for placement on the Public Registers in keeping with GCR Order 63 Rule 8 unless embargoed by direction issued under GCR Order 63 Rule 3(4). 11.2. Subject to paragraph 9 above, a document to which an electronic certificate has been applied shall be deemed to be filed on the date and time that the document was submitted to the Platform, provided that where a document has not been accepted for filing and is resubmitted through the Platform, the date and time of filing shall be the date and time of resubmission of that document. 12. Electronic Service of documents 12.1. Subject to the requirements of the GCR for personal service of documents in the first instance, it is directed that in addition to the means set out in GCR Order 65 Rule 5(1) for substituted service, any documents requested by the filing party to be served may be served electronically by way of the e-filing and e-service systems of the Platform. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 12.2. Electronic service of e-filed documents may be effected through the electronic service address of a party which includes: a. An electronic mail (email) address. b. Other given electronic media address (SMS or text message). 12.3. A party specifically consents to accept electronic service by: \u2014 a. serving and filing a notice or written consent on any other party, that the party accepts electronic service. The electronic service address at which the party agrees to accept service must be stated in the notice or written consent; b. electronically filing any document or acknowledging service of any document electronically. The party is deemed to agree to accept service at the electronic service address from which the electronic filing or acknowledgment is made, provided that self-represented parties must affirmatively consent to electronic service as provided under subparagraph (a); c. including an electronic service address in the address for service in the prescribed form of originating process filed pursuant to GCR Order 5; d. registering an account on the Platform. The email address provided during registration shall be the electronic service address for the registered party. 12.4. An electronic service address is presumed valid for a party if the party files electronic documents with the Court from that address and has not filed and served notice that the address is no longer valid. 12.5. A party who has consented to electronic service under 12.3 must promptly notify the Court and other parties electronically of any change in their electronic service address. 12.6. A party who receives a document that is served electronically and is unable to view or download the document must promptly notify the serving party and the serving party shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the document can be viewed and downloaded. 12.7. A document served to an electronic service address is considered served on the date and time that it is sent. 13. Proof of service 13.1. Electronic confirmation of delivery shall serve as proof of service for all documents served electronically provided that if any dispute arises as to whether service occurred, it shall be resolved by a Judge. 13.2. Electronic confirmation of delivery shall include: a. E-mail delivery or read receipt; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 b. Confirmation that an embedded hyperlink in the message envelope was accessed; c. Acknowledgement of receipt by the recipient party, by the recipient party\u2019s Attorney-at- Law; or d. Other means sufficient to satisfy the Court that the document(s) came to the notice of the recipient party such as an electronic certificate of e-service generated by the platform. 14. Electronic Service by or on the Court 14.1. The Court may electronically serve any notice, order, judgment, or other document issued by the Court on a party to a case or respondent to the judicial process by delivering same to the electronic service address given by that party or respondent. 14.2. A party may serve a document which is required to be served on the Court by filing and serving same through the Platform for delivery to the email address of the Clerk of Court. 15. Discontinuation 15.1. The use of emails for the filing of documents pursuant to Practice Direction 5 of 2020 is discontinued from the 8th January 2021until further notice. Issued by the Honourable Chief Justice of the Cayman Islands pursuant to Order 1, Rule 12(1) of the CR on this 14th day of December 2020. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021 COURT FEES RULES (as amended and revised) (\u201cthe Rules\u201d) - GRAND COURT RULES ORDER 62 RULE 3(1) 1. Where, in accordance with Rule 3(10(b) of the Rules, the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the Court, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such from among those listed within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time). 2. In determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court will consider whether the taxation can thereby be dealt with more expeditiously and effectively taking account of the amount of the bill and the complexity of the taxation. 3. The Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(1O)(b), the allocation to a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of Court who will also taking into account the likely complexity of the taxation and any potential for a conflict of interest between any of the taxing officers and any of the parties involved in thetaxation. 4. Where the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(1O)(b) any of the parties to the taxation may, at any time up to 7 days after the lodging of the bill for taxation, make representations to the Clerk of the Court regarding any potential conflict of interests with any of the taxing officers listed in Schedule 1. 5. The Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10 days of the lodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of the identity of the taxing officer and the fees that are payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) of Part C of the First Schedule to the Rules. No taxation will commence until the fees payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) have been received. 6. Where fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b) of Part C of the First Schedule, the parties will be notified by the Clerk of Court of the amount of fees payable within 7 days of the receipt by the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The certificate will not be issued until these fees are paid. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7. Where appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate the functions described under paragraphs 3- 6 hereof to a Deputy Clerk of Court or to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. Dated this 2nd day of May Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (Schedule 1) TAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE (Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1)) Effective 1st January 2021 Ms Cherry Bridges Attorney-at-Law Mr William Helfrecht Attorney-at-Law Mr Delroy Murray Attorney-at-Law Mr Derek Jones Attorney-at-Law Mr Robert Jones Attorney-at-Law GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021 EXHIBITS IN CRIMINAL CASES 1. This Practice Direction relates to orders and safe custody of Exhibits and Relevant Investigative Material and shall be read and construed in keeping with the Exhibits Rules. 2. Following the commencement of proceedings for an offence, the Court shall consider at the first case management hearing (or on arraignment in the Summary Court if the case is to be then disposed of) what orders should be made in relation to the inspection, retention, transfer, return, destruction or other disposal of items intended to be produced in evidence (in whole or in part) at trial or to be represented by Exhibits in another form (\u201cRelevant Investigative Material\u201d), including orders for the form in which they are to be exhibited. All parties will be expected to have clear instructions in this regard prior to that hearing, particularly in cases involving perishable items, dangerous items, controlled drugs (in keeping with section 8 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (as amended and revised), items of high monetary\/personal value, or items requiring large amounts of storage space. 3. Before any item is marked as an Exhibit at trial, careful consideration should be given to whether this is necessary or whether it may be possible to adduce the evidence in another manner (e.g. by producing it for temporary inspection by the tribunal of fact, or by the use of other evidence of it whether by schedule, photograph, other media or otherwise). 4. Where the Court considers it appropriate to do so, e.g. on grounds of health, safety, security, convenience, or by the agreement of the parties, it may order that an Exhibit that is no longer required in Court is transferred to the safe custody of the relevant Law Enforcement Agency (or otherwise) on such terms as shall be expedient. 5. The Court retains a discretion to make case-specific orders at or before the conclusion of trial relating to the retention, transfer, return, destruction or other disposal of individual Exhibits and Relevant Investigative Material, including specifying the form in which they may be retained and, exceptionally, orders varying the minimum retention periods as set out in the Exhibits Rules. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 6. Parties have a duty to consider what further or other orders in respect of exhibits and Relevant Investigative Material are required or appropriate at the conclusion of trial. They should endeavour to agree any such orders and, if they cannot, identify in an agreed note all issues of contention for determination at the conclusion of trial. 7. The Court may, in the interests of justice and in an appropriate case, hear representations from interested third parties as to the disposal of individual Exhibits or Relevant Investigative Material. 8. Parties have a duty to ensure that any Exhibit that has been opened or unsealed in Court for inspection or otherwise is resealed at the first appropriate time and during any adjournment. 9. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions shall forthwith notify in writing the relevant Law Enforcement Agency of any order relating to Exhibits or Relevant Investigative Material and provide to it a copy of the same. 10. On notification by His Majesty\u2019s Cayman Islands Prison Service of the release or discharge of a person to whom Rule [.7] of the Exhibits Rules applies, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions shall forthwith notify in writing the relevant Law Enforcement Agency of the same. Hon Anthony Smellie QC Chief Justice The Cayman Islands 29 November 2021 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 LISTING AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS Judicial Listing Officers\u2019 responsibility and key principles Much of this Direction is based upon the English Criminal Practice Direction 2015 and it must be read in conjunction with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 5 of 2015 (Criminal Case Management in the Summary Court). Listing as a judicial responsibility and function A1.  Listing is both a judicial and administrative function. The purpose is to ensure that all cases are brought to a hearing or trial in accordance with the interests of justice, that the resources available for criminal justice are deployed as effectively as possible, and that cases are heard by an appropriate judicial officer or bench with the minimum of delay. (a) The Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate, in consultation with the Listing Officer and Case Progression Offices respectively of the Grand and the Summary Court (CPO) shall have the overall responsibility for approving the weekly list of all Grand Court and Summary Court matters, respectively. The Chief Justice will assign day to day responsibility to the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Divisions for the listing of criminal cases. (b) The Listing Officer and the CPO respectively of the Grand Court and Summary Courts is responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operation of listing practice under the direction of the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate. The Listing Officer\/CPO has one of the most important functions at the Courts and makes a vital contribution to the efficient running of Court and to the efficient operation of the administration of criminal justice; (c) In the Grand Court, the CPO, subject to the daily supervision of the Judge responsible for the Criminal Division, is responsible for liaising with the Listing Officer to settle the list of Grand Court criminal hearings and trials. To this end the CPO and the Listing Officer shall meet every week on Thursday to settle the List of criminal cases for the ensuing week. (d) In the Summary Courts, the CPO, subject to the supervision of the Chief Magistrate, is responsible for administering the listing practice. The day-to-day setting of that listing practice is the responsibility of the Chief Magistrate in consultation with the Magistrates and with the assistance of the CPO. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Key principles of listing A2. When approving the lists, the Chief Justice [or the assigned Judge] and Chief Magistrate respectively will take into account the following principles: (a) Ensure the timely trial of cases and resolution of other issues (such as confiscation) so that justice is not delayed. The following factors are relevant: i. In general, each case should be tried within as short a time of its arrival in the Court as is consistent with the interests of justice, the needs of victims and witnesses, and with the proper and timely preparation by the prosecution and defence of their cases in accordance with the directions and timetable set; ii. Priority should be accorded to the trial of young defendants, and cases where there are vulnerable or young witnesses. In R v Barker [2010] WWCA Crim 4, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales highlighted \u201cthe importance to the trial and investigative process of keeping any delay in a case involving a child complainant to an irreducible minimum\u201d; iii. Custody time limits imposed by the Constitution, the Police Act or habeas corpus principles should be observed; iv. Every effort must be made to avoid delay including in cases in which the defendant is on bail; (b) Ensure that in the Summary Courts, unless impracticable, non-custody anticipated guilty plea cases are listed no longer than 14 days after a charge is filed with the Court, and non-custody anticipated not guilty pleas are listed no longer than 28 days after a charge is filed [See also in this regard, the provisions of paragraph 13.4 \u2013 13.6 of Practice Direction No. 5 of 2015]; (c) Provide, when possible, for certainty and\/or as much advance notice as possible, of the trial date; and take all reasonable steps to ensure that the trial date remains fixed: (d) Ensure that a Judge or Magistrate (with any necessary authorisation and of appropriate experience) is available to try each case and, wherever desirable and practicable, there is judicial continuity, including in relation to post-trial hearings. (e) Strike an appropriate balance in the use of resources, by taking account of: i. The efficient deployment of the judiciary in the Grand Court and the Summary Courts; ii. The proper use of the courtrooms available at the courts and in this regard schedules for allocation of courtrooms will be prepared in consultation with the Court Administrator and published along with the Lists on the weekly basis; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 iii. The provision in long and\/or complex cases for adequate reading and judgment writing time for the judiciary; [See in this regard Practice Direction No.1 of 2012] iv. The facilities in the available courtrooms including the security needs (such as secure dock), size and equipment, such as video and live link facilities; v. The proper use of the facilities by those who attend the Courts as jurors; vi. The availability of and need for certified interpreters in the Courts; vii. The need to return those remanded or sentenced to custody as soon as possible after the remand is made or sentence is passed, and to facilitate the efficient operation of the prison services; (f) Provide where practicable and within available legal aid resources: i. the defendant with the advocate of their choice where this does not result in any delay to the trial of the case. (g) Meet the need, in consultation with the Head of Security (and where appropriate the RCIPS and Prison Services), for special security measures for high-risk defendants; (h) Ensure that proper time (including judicial reading time) is afforded to hearings in which the court is exercising powers that impact on the rights of individuals, such as applications for investigative orders, bail hearings or warrants\u2019 (i) Consider the significance of ancillary proceedings, such as confiscation hearings, and the need to deal with such hearings promptly and, where possible, for such hearings to be conducted by the trial judge. A3  Although the listing practice for each Court will take these principles into account the listing practice adopted may vary depending particularly on the number of courtrooms and the facilities available, the workload, its volume and type. Discharge of judicial responsibilities A4. The Presiding Judicial Officer of each court is responsible for \u2014 i. ensuring that good practice is implemented throughout the Court, such that all hearings commence on time; ii. ensuring that the cause of trials that do not proceed on the date originally fixed are examined to see if there is any systematic issue; iii. monitoring the general performance of the Court and the listing practices; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 iv. monitoring the timeliness of cases and reporting any cases of serious concern to the Chief Justice or Chief Magistrate (as the case might be). B Listing of trials, Custody Time Limits and transfer of cases [Custody Time Limits have been the subject of consultation with the Criminal Justice Reform Committee (CJRC) and the Attorney General] Estimates of trial length B1.  Under the regime set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules, the parties will be expected to provide an accurate estimate of the length of trial at the hearing where the case is to be managed (CMH 1) based on a detailed estimate of the time to be taken with each witness to be called, and accurate information about the availability of witnesses. B2.  At the hearing the Court will ask the prosecution to clarify any custody time limit (\u201cCTL\u201d) dates which may be applicable. Once the CTL is clarified and approved by the Court, the Court must direct the court clerk to ensure the CTL date is marked clearly on the court file or electronic file. When a case is subject to a CTL all efforts must be made at the first hearing to list the case within the CTL and the Judge or Magistrate should seek to ensure this. Further guidance on listing CTL cases can be found below. Cases that should usually have fixed trial dates B3. The cases where fixtures should be given should usually include the following: i. Cases involving persons in custody; ii. Cases involving serious indictable offences; iii. Cases involving protected, vulnerable and intimidated witnesses (including domestic violence cases), whether or not special measures have been ordered by the court; iv. Cases where the witnesses are under 18 or have to come from overseas; v. Cases estimated to last more than a certain time \u2013 the period chosen will depend on the availability of judicial officers, counsel (defence and prosecution) and courtrooms; vi. Cases where a previous hearing has not been effective; vii. Re-trials; and viii. Cases involving expert witnesses. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Custody Time Limits B4.  Unlike in England and Wales1,1 in the Cayman Islands there are no specific custody time limits imposed by statute other than those which control police powers to keep persons in custody pending investigations under section 65 of the Police Act. To help to address this deficit, by Rule 9 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 (CPR) time- frames for the taking of arraignments and the fixing of trial dates are imposed. Also, by paragraph 11 of Practice Direction 5 of 2015 timeframes for conclusion of criminal proceedings in the Summary Courts are identified. The Directions which follow below are intended to reaffirm and clarify the responsibility of the Courts and the parties to ensure that cases are disposed of as soon as reasonably practicable and in so doing to ensure also that custody time limits (CTLs) are strictly observed. It must be emphasised that in keeping with section 7(1) of the Constitutional Bill of Rights, everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of that person\u2019s legal rights and obligations by an independent and impartial court within a reasonable time. This right becomes even more compelling when a person is in custody awaiting trial. Accordingly the following timeframes and CTLs should be observed and paragraph 11 of Practice Direction 5 of 2015 must be read as if amended by implication: i. Every case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Summary Court should aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 3 months from the date of first hearing; ii. Every case involving a defendant in custody before the Summary Court to be committed for trial in the Grand Court2 should aim to be committed, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 6 weeks from the date of first appearance in the Summary Court. iii. Every case involving a defendant in custody to be tried before the Grand Court should aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances, within 9 months from the date of first appearance in the Grand Court and in keeping with Rule 9(4) of the CPR, a date for trial shall be fixed within 6 months of arraignment. 1 Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 enables the Secretary of State by regulations to set time limits in relation to preliminary stages of criminal proceeding. This is done by way of the Prosecution of Offences Custody Time Limit Regulations 1987 which set time limits for cases to be brought to arraignment. 2 Pursuant to section 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2019 Revision) Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 iv. Accordingly and in keeping with Rule 9(3) of the CPR, arraignments should ordinarily proceed no later than 28 days following committal or transmittal of a case to the Grand Court except where there are outstanding experts\u2019 reports as to fitness to plead or the Court is satisfied that the case is complex or involved. In furtherance of the foregoing, at the first hearing, the prosecution will inform the court of any applicable CTL when the CTL lapses and the CTL will be endorsed on the case file. i. All efforts must be made to list the case within the CTL. ii. If suitable, the case should be given priority and listed on a date not less than 2 weeks before the CTL expires, and the case may be placed in a warned list. iii. The CTL must be kept under continual review by the parties (the Defence and ODPP), HMPS and the presiding judicial officer. iv. If the CTL is at risk of being exceeded, an additional hearing should take place and should be listed before the trial judge or other judge nominated by the Chief Justice or Chief Magistrate (as the case may be). v. Where courtroom or judge availability is an issue, the court must itself list the case to consider the extension of any CTL. vi. Where courtroom or judge availability is not in issue, but all parties and the court agree that the case will not be ready for trial before the expiration of the CTL, a date may be fixed outside the CTL. This may be done without prejudice to any application to extend the CTLs or with the express consent of the defence; and this must be noted on the case file. B5. As legal argument may delay the swearing in of a jury, it is desirable to extend the CTL to a date later than the first day of the trial. Re-trials ordered by the Court of Appeal and Grand Court B6. The Court must comply with the directions of the Court of Appeal and cannot vary directions for retrials without reference to the Court of Appeal. B7. In cases where a re-trial is ordered by the Court of Appeal without a time-frame being directed, the CTL will be 90 days starting from the date that the new indictment is preferred i.e. from the date that the indictment is delivered to the Grand Court. In cases where a re-trial is ordered of a charge before the Summary Court, whether by the Court of Appeal or the Grand Court, the CTL will be 56 days from the date that the new charge is preferred i.e. from the date that the charge is delivered to the Summary Court. The Courts shall notify the HMPS of this. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Changes to the date of fixed cases B8. Once a trial date or window is fixed, it should not be vacated or moved without good reason. Under the Criminal Procedure Rules, parties are expected to be ready by the trial date. B9.  The Listing Officer or CPO may, in circumstances determined by the presiding judicial officer, agree to the movement of the trial to a date to which the defence and prosecution both consent, provided the timely hearing of the case is not delayed. The prosecution will be expected to have consulted the witnesses before agreeing to any change. For indictments changes to trial dates should only be made on approval of Head of Grand Court Criminal Division or the Judge who has conduct of the case. The Listing Officer or CPO may in circumstances determined by the Head of the Grand Court Criminal Division, agree to changes of other listings. For example, changes in dates for sentencing where SIRs and VIRs are not ready. B10. In all other circumstances, requests to adjourn or vacate fixtures or trial windows must be referred to the Assigned Judge or Magistrate for that person\u2019s personal attention. Listing of hearings other than trials C.1. In addition to trials, the court\u2019s listing practice will have to provide court time for shorter matters, such as those listed below at C3. These hearings are important, often either for setting the necessary case management framework for the proper and efficient preparation of cases for trial, or for determining matters that affect the rights of individuals. They must be afforded the appropriate level of resource that they require to be considered properly, and this may include judicial reading and judgment writing time, as well as an appropriate length of hearing. C.2. The applicant is responsible for notifying the court, and the other party if appropriate, and ensuring that the papers are served in good time, including a time estimate for judicial reading time and for the hearing. The applicant must endeavor to complete the application within the time estimate provided unless there are exceptional circumstances. C.3. Hearings other than trials include the following: i. Applications for search warrants and Production Orders, sufficient reading time must be provided, see C.8. below; ii. Bail applications; iii. Applications to vacate or adjourn hearings; iv. Applications for dismissal of charges; v. Preparation for trial hearings, plea and trial preparation hearings, and other pretrial case management hearings; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 vi. Applications for disclosure by the Crown of further unused material; vii. Case progression or case management hearings (CMHs); viii. Applications in respect of sentence indications not sought at the CMH; ix. Sentences; x. Applications under the Criminal Procedure Code or Evidence Act; xi. Appeals from the Summary Courts: it is essential in all cases where witnesses are likely to be needed on the appeal to check availability before a date is fixed; xii. Appeals from the Youth Court: a directions hearing will be required to consider special measures, ground rules and appropriate adjustments for the hearing of a re-trial. C.4. Short hearings should not generally be listed before a judge such that they may delay the start or continuation of a trial at the Grand Court. It is envisaged that any such short hearing will be completed by 10:30am or start after 4:30pm. C.5. Each Court equipped with a video link with the prisons or RCIPS Detention Center must have in place arrangements for the conduct of remand hearings, pre-trial hearings and sentencing hearings. Notifying sureties of hearing dates C.6. Where a surety has entered into a recognisance in the Summary Court in respect of a case allocated or sent to the Grand Court and where the bail order or recognisance refers to attendance at the first hearing in the Grand Court, the defendant should be reminded by the presiding Magistrate (or by the CPO or Court Clerk acting upon the direction of the presiding Magistrate) that the surety should attend the first hearing in the Grand Court in order to provide further recognisance if ordered by the Grand Court. If attendance is not arranged, the defendant may be remanded in custody pending the recognisance being provided. C.7. The Court should also notify sureties of the dates of the hearing at the Grand Court at which the defendant is ordered to appear as far in advance as possible: see the observations of Parker LJ in R v Crown Court at Reading ex p. Bello [1992] 3 All ER 353. See also the Criminal Procedure Rules, rule 8 by which the Grand Court may impose new bail conditions and require new bail forms to be completed. Application for Production Orders and Search Warrants C.8. The use of production orders and search warrants involves the use of intrusive state powers that affect the rights and liberties of individuals. It is the responsibility of the court to ensure that those powers are not abused. To do so, the court must be presented with a properly completed application, on the appropriate form, which includes a summary of the investigation to provide the context for the order, a clear explanation GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 of how the statutory requirements are fulfilled, and full and frank disclosure of anything that might undermine the basis of the application. Further directions on the proper making and consideration of such applications will be provided by Practice Direction. However, the complexity of the application must be taken into account in listing it such that the judge is afforded appropriate reading time and the hearing is given sufficient time for the issues to be considered thoroughly, and a short judgment given. Confiscation and Related Hearings C.9. By virtue of section 44 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (as amended and revised) (POCA), applications for restraint orders should be determined by a Judge of the Grand Court. C.10.In order to prevent possible dissipation of assets of significant value, applications under the POCA should be considered urgent when lists are being fixed. In order to prevent potential prejudice, applications for the variation and discharge of orders, for the appointment of receivers, and applications to punish alleged breaches of orders as a contempt of court should similarly be treated as urgent and listed expeditiously. Confiscation Hearings C.11.It is important that confiscation hearings take place in good time after the defendant is convicted or sentenced. Publication of Lists The Listing Officer or CPO of the Grand Court and Summary Court, will, in consultation with the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate respectively continue to publish weekly lists of hearings in those Courts. Lists will show the courtrooms which are respectively allocated to each Court on the weekly basis. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal will continue to publish lists in advance for each session in consultation with the President of the Court of Appeal Effective Date This Practice Direction shall come into effect on 14th April 2022 Dated this 7th day of April 2022 Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C. Chief Justice Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS Financial Services Division 1. Appointment of Registrar of the FSD 1.1 With effect from February 2016, Mrs. Shiona Allenger, the Clerk of the Court was also designated as the Registrar of the FSD (appointed pursuant to Rule 2(1) of the Grand Court (Amendment) Rules 2009) and became directly responsible for administrative case management as the focal contact person for attorneys and other persons doing business with the FSD. With effect from 30 October 2020 Mrs Bridget Clare (nee Myers) was appointed Acting Registrar of the FSD. The FSD Registry will continue to fall under the supervision of the Clerk of Courts and Mrs Clare with Mrs Clare being the first person to contact. 1.2 All communications with the FSD Registry should be- (a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor, Kirk House; or (b) by e-mail addressed to bridget.clare@judicial.ky and\/or shiona.allenger@judicial.ky (c) by telephone 244 3808. 1.3 References hereinafter to the Registrar will include the Acting Registrar and vice versa as circumstances may require. 2. Assignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD 2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting on the directions of the Chief Justice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined in GCR O.72, r.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the proceeding is commenced. 2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner's or plaintiff's attorney to provide the Registrar with any and all information which appears to be relevant in determining which judge should be assigned to the matter. For example- (a) If the plaintiffs attorney considers that it would be appropriate for two or more related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process: or GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (b) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be inappropriate for a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever reason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the originating process. 2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will - (a) notify the parties' attorneys; and (b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge. 2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned judge on the next business day following the day on which the originating process is filed at the FSD Registry. 2.5 The Registrar will ensure that the docket of the financial services proceedings assigned to each Judge of the FSD is kept up to date and circulated weekly to the Chief Justice. 2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.72, r. 2(6) requires that the initials of the assigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part of the cause number. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must be included as part of the cause number as it appears in all pleadings, affidavits and orders. 3. Procedure for listing hearings 3.1 Mrs Yasmin Ebanks will continue to serve as Listing Officer for the Grand Court including the FSD and will continue to make Listings in consultation with the Acting Registrar of the FSD. 3.2 Listing for FSD cases will be primarily managed by the Acting FSD Registrar in liaison with the Listing Officer. All requests for FSD listings must be made by email addressed to Bridget.Clare@judicial.ky or to Shiona.Allenger@judicial.ky, copied to Yasmin.Ebanks@judicial.ky. 3.3 For the purposes of this Practice Direction the expression \\\"hearing\\\" shall continue to include summonses for directions, case management conferences (\\\"CMCs\\\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference calls), interlocutory applications and trials. 3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has been assigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to review the Court file. 3.5 All applications whether made by summons or by letter (where the application is for a matter to be taken on the papers in keeping with FSD Users Guide Section Bl) must be filed with the FSD Registry and the appropriate fees paid before presentation to the judge. 3.6 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to the FSD. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 3.7 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the availability of judges, the Registry of the FSD and Listing Officer are not authorised to fix any hearing date without the prior approval of the assigned judge. If the assigned judge is not already familiar with the issues or cannot readily ascertain the issues relevant to the proposed hearing by reviewing the Court file, the parties may be required to produce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72, r.4(3). 3.8 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned judge in consultation with the Acting Registrar and Listing Officer, will normally fix the hearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions or at a CMC in which all parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel) will be requiredto participate. 3.9 The Acting Registrar in conjunction with the Listing Officer will publish a monthly list (on the 1st of each month) of hearings scheduled in the FSD for the ensuing month. 4. Listing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions 4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for reducing the share capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies Act) the petitioner's attorney is required (pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6) to issue a summons for directions at the same time as presenting the petition. 4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the proposed order for directions including the timetable for the company meeting(s) and court hearing(s), together with a covering letter which explains whether and, if so, why the matter is particularly time sensitive. 4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the assigned Judge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be dispensed with under s.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional case where settlement of a list of creditors is required under s.15(2), and the materials filed do not disclose any other reason for the assigned Judge to require additional evidence or submissions, then that Judge may make an order for directions without the need for a hearing. In all other cases that Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing in chambers. 5. Listing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders under s.124 5.1 Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of the Companies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made without the need for any hearing (pursuant to CWR O.15, r.5(1).) 5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which further evidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may convene a CMC GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 or (in consultation with the Registrar) direct the Listing Officer to fix a date for hearing the petition in open court. 6. Applications for an order that a company be restored to the Register 6.1 Applications made by a company or one of its members, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.17, are determined by the Registrar of the FSD and Form Nos. 66 and 67 should be amended accordingly. 6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17 (6) (c), that an application ought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the Registrar will - (a) assign the application to a judge of the FSD; (b) fix a hearing date; and (c) give notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail. 6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.18, will continue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD. 6.4 At the same time as referring a creditor's application to a judge of the FSD, the Registrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to advertise the petition and give other creditors an opportunity to be heard, the hearing will be fixed on a date not less than 21 days nor more than 28 days after the date on which the petition is presented. 7. Applications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred 7.1 An application by an official liquidator or other officeholder (hereinafter \\\"officeholder) for a direction, pursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), that payment of court fees be deferred, must be made to the assigned judge. 7.2 Such applications should be made by letter signed by the officeholder personally, addressed to the assigned judge and sent to the Registrar. 7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and that person\u2019s decision will be communicated to the applicant and the Registrar by the judge's personal assistant. 7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the officeholder shall have the right to ask the Judge to reconsider that Judge\u2019s decision, for which purpose the applicant may ask the judge's personal assistant to fix an appointment for the officeholder to appear before the Judge in person. 7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules is to ensure that an officeholder who is required or entitled to make an application to the Court in the performance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will be payable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not be deterred Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 from performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in the position of having to pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s own pocket. 7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an officeholder has under that officeholder\u2019s control \\\"sufficient money with which to pay the fees immediately\\\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge will have regard to the general rules as to priority contained in CWR Order 20, the effect of which is that court fees rank ahead of an officeholder's remuneration. 7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under that officeholder\u2019s control, the officeholder\u2019s application letter must state (a) the amount which is immediately available; (b) the amount which is likely to become available to that officeholder within the next 90 days; (c) the purposes for which the officeholder intends to spend such cash over the next 90 days; and (d) whether the officeholder has received any remuneration or holds funds in trust for that purpose. 7.8 As court fees must be paid in priority to other claims including a liquidator's remuneration, an officeholder will be obliged to ensure the payment of court fees in keeping with that priority. Court fees deferred are a debt owed to the Government and will be enforceable as such 8. Applications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as \\\"consolidated\\\" for the purposes of assessing court fees 8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff pursuant to Rule 6(5) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) for a direction that two or more separate proceedings governed by the Companies Act and the Companies Winding Up Rules or GCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of calculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable pursuant to Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) must be made to the Registrar. 8.2 Such applications shall be made by letter addressed to the Registrar at the time of filing the originating process. 8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the provisions of paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shallapply. 8.4 In deciding upon an application under Rule 6(5) the assigned judge will have regard to the fact that the filing of each proceeding will have engaged the time and effort of the Registrar and support staff and whether instead of ordering that only one set of fees shall be payable, the additional fees paid or some reasonable GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 proportion of them, shall be applied to cover fees which will be due for the hearing of the consolidated proceeding going forward.1 9. Case Management Conferences 9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of 0.72, r.4 (2), the assigned Judge may convene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit. 9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if foreign lawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the parties or the assigned judge is likely to be off the Island. 9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a video conference or telephone call, the Registrar will direct the IT Department to set up the call and circulate the log-in instructions to the Judge and all the parties. Where the CMC takes the form of a telephone call, the Registrar will direct one of the parties (usually the applicant) to set up the call and circulate the dial in instructions and codes to the Judge and all the parties. 9.4 The etiquette for video conference (or telephone) CMCs requires that all participating attorneys (apart from leading counsel or foreign lawyers who may participate remotely) must be present in the court room or Judge's chambers and be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge will be the last person to join the conference, whereupon the Judge will ask all the participants to identify themselves. Where the CMC will not be determinative of substantive issues, the Judge may, in advance to the hearing, dispense with the need for the attorney(s) to be present at Court and, in which event; the other provisions of this practice direction will apply accordingly. 9.5 Video conference (or telephonic) CMC's may not be recorded without the consent of the Judge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be recorded, the Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the judge for approval and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not recorded, the note taken or approved by the Judge will constitute the official record. 9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the Judge during the course of a CMC and, in appropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the principal purpose of fixing the date for the trial or further hearings. 10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD 1 Direction 8.4 recognises the authority given by Rule 6(5) (with the approval of Cabinet) for the ordering of abatement of fees while also recognising that section 41(ba) of the Public Management and Finance Act (2018 Revision) provides that ''.4 ministry or portfolio shall not - (ba) waive any revenues\\\". Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 10.1 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear summonses for directions and other interlocutory applications by means of telephone or video conferences when they are off the Island. 10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes place by telephone or video conference. 10.3 As explained at [11) of Practice Direction 6 of 2020 Trials of any FSD cause or matter or any question or issue arising therein, may take place in the United Kingdom. This will continue until further notice. 10.4 Practice Directions 6 and 6A of 2020 will continue to apply generally to FSD causes or matters until further notice. 11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 13th day of April, 2022. With effect from 13th day of April, 2022 Practice Direction No. 1 of 2021 is revoked. 12 April 2022 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 JUDICIAL MEDIATION GUIDELINES Purpose 1. The Courts of the Cayman Islands are committed to resolving disputes in the most efficient manner possible, including the use of non-adjudicative processes. Accordingly, Judges and Magistrates will in appropriate cases encourage parties to engage in mediation. 2. By the Overiding Objective the Court's duty is to manage cases so as to help the parties to settle the whole or part of the proceedings. To this end several members of the judiciary have been trained and certified as mediators. They are ably supported by a professionally trained co-ordinator. 3. The purpose of this practice note is to set out the guidelines for the referral of matters to judicial mediation and the procedures for the conduct of judicial mediations in other than family cases. The mediation procedure applicable to the Family Division will continue to apply. Referral to Judicial Mediation 4. A matter may be referred by the Court to judicial mediation at any stage in the proceeding in keeping with the Overriding Objective, the MIAMs procedure in the Family Division of the Grand Court and Practice Direction 4 of 2022 on the Listing of Civil Proceedings in the Civil Division Short Summonses and Assigned Judges. 5. By virtue of section 29 of the Grand Court Act, a judge acting as a judicial mediator has the same immunity as a judge acting judicially. Criteria for Referral to Judicial Mediation 6. A matter referred to mediation will usually have one or more of the following features: \u2022 an earlier unsuccessful private mediation; \u2022 one or more parties with limited resources; \u2022 a substantial risk that the costs and time of a trial would be disproportionately high compared to the amount in dispute or the subject matter of the dispute; \u2022 an estimated trial length that would occupy substantial judicial and other court resources; or Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 \u2022 aspects that otherwise make it in the interests of justice that the matter be referred to judicial mediation. 7. There are proceedings which, as a matter of policy, may not be appropriate for mediation. The following disputes will not ordinarily be referred for mediation: \u2022 cases involving the resolution of a matter of public importance which, in the public interest, ought to be heard in open court; \u2022 cases in which the Court is to review the exercise of a statutory power or discretion; \u2022 cases in which the commission of a crime or serious misconduct is alleged in the context of a civil proceeding; and \u2022 cases in which there is a litigant in person. Preparation for the judicial mediation 8. Directions regarding preparation for the mediation will be made at a MIAM or preliminary case conference. 9. The parties will be told when and where the mediation will take place and who is to attend. Parties will usually be provided with a statement of the proposed course of the mediation. Representatives are welcome to attend. 10. Parties will be informed prior to the commencement of a mediation of any preconditions, expectations or particular requirements. These may include a requirement to provide specified documents and other information, position papers or confidential offers. Confidentiality 11. Parties and other participants are to protect the confidentiality of all that is said and done by any person in the course of the conduct of a mediation. 12. It will be the usual practice of the mediator to destroy all materials provided to or prepared by the mediator and any other court officer participating in the mediation, following completion of the mediation, whether successful or not. Attendance at mediations 13. A mediator may authorise the attendance at a mediation of persons other than the parties and their legal representatives. Participation of all persons in the mediation will be under the direction and control of the mediator. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 14. In the absence of the mediator's express authorisation to the contrary, it is expected that the mediation will be attended by parties or representatives of the parties who have full authority to settle the proceeding. Participation by telephone or video-link will be allowed only in exceptional circumstances. 15. The mediator will inform the parties of the identity of all attendees prior to the commencement of the mediation. Legal advice or assistance 16. A A mediator will not evaluate issues in dispute or provide legal advice to parties, and will not assist with the preparation of any terms of settlement. When agreement is reached the mediator may give guidance for the settling of the terms of agreement 16.B. The settled tenns of agreement, may with the consent of the parties, be embodied in an order of the Court to be executed by the mediator in that mediator\u2019s judicial capacity and in which event, will become binding as such. Meeting Separately with the Parties - Caucusing 17. Mediation styles and practices will differ between judicial mediators. Some mediators may be prepared to caucus, depending on the nature and circumstances of the case. Other mediators may not be prepared to do so. 18. A mediator will not meet separately with a party and their legal representatives, or with the legal representatives of a party, in the absence of some or all of the other parties, without the express approval of all parties to the mediation. 19. Information provided by a party to a mediator in a separate session will not be disclosed to any other party unless the mediator has been expressly authorised to do so. This will not restrict the mediator from terminating the mediation upon receiving information which by its nature is open to an interpretation of illegal, improper or unethical conduct. Adjournment 20. A mediator may adjourn the mediation to continue at a later date, either under the conduct of the same or a different mediator. 21. If the proceeding fails to settle at mediation, the mediator may give directions for the further conduct of the proceeding in their capacity as a judge or associate judge. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Subsequent trial 22. No member of the Court will hear and determine an issue in a proceeding in which that person acted as a mediator, or where that person has become acquainted with any confidential information relating to the mediation of the dispute (e.g. where confidential information was provided in preparation for a mediation that was subsequently conducted by another judicial officer. 15 August 2022 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022 LISTING OF CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIVIL DIVISION, SHORT SUMMONSES AND ASSIGNED JUDGES 1. Application and Commencement This Practice Direction applies to civil proceedings other than proceedings in the Family Division which are covered by Practice Direction No. 6\/12 and proceedings in the Financial Services Division which are covered by Practice Direction No. I of 2021 (\\\"Civil Proceedings\\\"). 2. Short Summonses 2.1 This Practice Direction will take effect from 1st October 2022 and will apply to every interlocutory summons issued pursuant to GCR O.32 having endorsed upon it a time estimate of\u00bd hour or less (hereafter called a \\\"Short Summons\\\"). 2.2 The presiding judge in the Civil Division (currently Madame Justice RamsayHale) (the \\\"Presiding Judge\\\") will sit on Thursday of each week (commencing 6th October 2022) for the purpose of hearing Short Summonses and the listing officer shall list Short Summonses to be heard on such days of the week. 2.3 Parties are reminded of GCR O.32, r.(2) (4) which imposes a duty to notify the Listing officer if, for whatever reason, the time estimate is no longer considered to be accurate. 2.4 Applications for consent orders should only be made by Short Summons if the order involves the exercise of a judicial discretion. If the parties are entitled to the order as of right, it should be processed administratively in accordance with GCR O.42, r.(5) and (5)A. 2.5 Summonses with a time estimate of more than \u00bd hour shall continue to be listed by the Listing Officer in the usual way. 3. Assignment of cases to judges 3.1 In order to maximise the efficiency and cost effectiveness with which Civil Cases are dealt with in the Grand Court consideration will be given by the Presiding Judge on a continuing basis, in conjunction with the Chief Justice as appropriate, as to whether cases that are more time consuming or complex Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (\\\"Complex Cases\\\") will benefit from being assigned to a particular judge (the \\\"Assigned Judge\\\"). 3.2 This decision may be taken early in the life of a case e.g. at the inter-partes hearing of an injunction, on an application for leave for judicial review pursuant to GCR O. r. 53, r.3, at the hearing of a summons for directions issued pursuant to GCR O. 25, r.l (1) or, as the matter progresses towards or is set down for trial. 3.3 If a party considers that it would be inappropriate for a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever reason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Presiding Judge at the time. 3.4 If a Complex Case is allocated to an Assigned Judge then the Listing Officer will be so informed and, thereafter, unless a matter is urgent and the Assigned Judge is unavailable, after consultation with the Assigned Judge the Listing Officer will ensure that interlocutory summonses and, the trial itself, will be listed before the Assigned Judge. 3.5 In accordance with the Overriding Objective as set out in the preamble to the Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised), the Assigned Judge will be expected to consider, at all times, how best to manage the Complex Cases which are assigned to them and to exercise appropriate and proportionate case management powers as they shall think fit including, in consultation with the parties via the Listing Officer, convening case management conferences and giving directions pursuant to e.g. GCR O.25, r.3 and GCR O.28, r.4. 3.6 The allocation of a particular Complex Case to an Assigned Judge shall remain a matter for the Presiding Civil Judge in consultation with the Chief Justice and shall remain within their discretion to change if that becomes necessary, for whatever reason. 3.7 Matters that are not designated as Complex Cases shall remain to be heard by any available judge. 15 August 2022 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022 PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT (as amended and revised) 1. By virtue of section 7(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised) (\\\"LPA''), Judges of the Grand Court are vested with the authority, for reasonable cause shown, to suspend an attorney-at-law from practicing or to order that that person\u2019s name be struck off the Court Roll. 2. A judge charged with the responsibility to determine a disciplinary complaint may not be the same person who determines whether or not disciplinary charges are to be instituted. See in this regard, the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Attorney \\\"A\\\" v The Attorney General C\/CA {Civil) Appeal No. 13 of 2021 (\\\"LPDC 1 of 2017\\\"} 27 October 2021. 3. This Practice Direction explains the procedure which will be engaged when a disciplinary complaint is made against an attorney. The procedure will involve the Chief Justice as head of the Judiciary and the Attorney General (the latter as ex officio head of the legal profession of the Cayman Islands pursuant to section 25 of the Grand Court Act (as amended and revised) and as representative of the Crown in the Courts in all matters in which rights of a public character come into question). 4. When a complaint about the conduct of an attorney is received, whether from a judge, a client of that attorney, another attorney or other third party, it shall be referred to the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice will consult with the Attorney General and consider whether, prima facie, the conduct described in the complaint may warrant the commencement of proceedings under section 7 of the LPA in the public interest. If, after consultation with the Attorney General, the Chief Justice considers that there is no case to answer this will be communicated to the complainant and no further steps will be taken. 5. If the Chief Justice, after consultation with the Attorney General, is of the view that there is a prima facie case against the attorney, the Chief Justice (if necessary with the assistance of the Attorney General or the Attorney Genernal\u2019s designate) will consider the charges to be made against the attorney and will afford the attorney an opportunity to explain in writing within 14 days (or such longer period as the Chief Justice shall provide) why the charge(s) should not be pursued. 6. After further consultation with the Attorney General if the Chief Justice remains of the view that charge(s) should proceed the Chief Justice will ask the Solicitor General to draft a Notice of Originating Motion setting out the charges and the basis therefor. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 7. The Notice of Originating Motion will not be placed on the Register of Writs and other Originating Process open to public inspection and will instead be placed on the Restricted Register of Writs and Other Originating Processes. While the Notice of Originating Motion is on the Restricted Register it will be open to public inspection only with the leave of the Court. 8. The Notice of Originating Motion will be allocated to a judge other than the Chief Justice. 9. The Solicitor General will cause the Notice of Originating Motion to be filed and served on the subject attorney and the Attorney General and the matter shall then proceed in accordance with the Grand Court Rules. 10. Proceedings under section 7 of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised) will be heard in private, and pleadings and documents anonymised, until the Court otherwise orders. 11. The burden and standard of proof shall be the same as in criminal proceedings. 12. If an order is made suspending an attorney, or striking an attorney's name from the Roll, the Court shall direct the date on which the proceedings in which the order is made shall cease to be private. On this date, or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter, the Clerk of the Court shall place the Notice of Originating Motion on the Register of Writs and Originating Process and the judgment on the Register of Judgments. 13. Throughout the proceedings the Attorney General or Solicitor General or a designate shall act as amicus curiae in that person\u2019s capacity as custodian of the public interest and ex officio head of the legal profession under section 25 of the Grand Court Act (as amended and revised). 14. EFFECTIVE DATE The Practice Direction shall come into effect on the 31 August 2022 15 August 2022 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 PUBLIC ACCESS TO CRIMINAL COURTS INTRODUCTION 1. Open justice and the transparency of the legal process are fundamental tenets of the Cayman legal system. Public access in respect of criminal proceedings is an aspect of and administered in accordance with this open justice principle; however, it is subject to limitations as recognised in law. The courts have inherent jurisdiction to determine how the principle should be applied in particular cases. 2. Fair and accurate reporting of proceedings is encouraged as integral to the Rule of Law and the Courts will continue to have regard to the open justice principle in considering the use of technology and access by the media. 3. Where a representative of the media requests access to material referred to in a court proceeding, there is a presumption in favour of providing access, in recognition of the role of the press as 'public watchdog' in a democratic society. The purpose of media access is to enable the public to understand and scrutinise the justice system 4. The presumption in favour of granting access does not mean that representatives of the media are 'entitled to disclosure', or that it should take place 'by default'. Not all documents need or may be provided. The assigned or sitting Judge or Magistrate (\\\"the Appropriate Judicial Officer\\\") may refuse access where there are compelling reasons against it. The presumption of providing access is capable of rebuttal for good and justifiable countervailing reason. Each decision must be reached on a case-by-case and document-by-document basis. MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES 5. For the purposes of this Practice Direction, a representative of the media is a registrant on the Courts Media Register (a \\\"Registrant\\\") or such other person as a Judge or Magistrate may, in that person\u2019s discretion, grant temporary recognition as a representative of a media outlet. GENERAL RULE 6. In accordance with the Constitution, criminal proceedings are generally held in public, save in such special and limited cases as may be prescribed by law or determined in interests of justice. Section 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) (the \\\"Code\\\") provides that the place in which a criminal court sits to try or hear proceedings relating to an offence shall generally be an open court. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Hearings must accordingly be held in a place accessible to the public without physical barrier so that members of the public, which expression includes representatives of the media, may enter without appointment. 7. Section 7(10) of the Bill of Rights scheduled to the Cayman Islands Constitution Order 2009 and Section IO of the Code also provide for discretionary powers to exclude the public generally or particular persons from the place or proceedings for a number of reasons, including when necessary to safeguard court proceedings or the integrity of the justice system. 8. The principles that apply to hearings in private apply also to the anonymisation of a party or witness. The court may order that the identity of any party or witness must not be disclosed if it considers non-disclosure necessary in order to protect the interests of that party or witness. 9. When such powers are exercised, reasons for their exercise shall be given publicly with appropriate opportunity provided for representations by affected persons. The court may receive such representations orally or in writing and determine the issue: 9.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or 9.2. without a hearing; 9.3. applications for anonymity or screening of witnesses should be heard in public save in exceptional circumstances in the interests of the administration of justice, such as when the prosecution may appropriately apply ex parte and without notice pursuant to section 7 of the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity Act) (2014 Revision), for an anonymity order. LIVE STREAMING 10. Access to open court hearings may, if practical and appropriate and insofar as the integrity of proceedings can be safeguarded, be by live streaming. Live streaming is not to be regarded as the norm or as a right but may be a discretionary supplement to the usual court access that underlies the open justice principle. Where available a live stream will be accessible outside the precincts of the Courts to Registrants by way of encrypted access. Court of Appeal Whether or not proceedings are live streamed is a matter for the discretion of the Court taking into account the particular circumstances of the case. Typically, since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in order to ensure public access remotely and in keeping with Practice Direction 7 of 2020, appeals to the Court of Appeal are live- GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 streamed and available for public view on the Judicial Website. The nature of appeals differs from that of proceedings at first instance in that appeals are usually confined to legal argument and thus the considerations may differ. Nonetheless, there may be cases in which that is not so or, for a variety of reasons, the Court of Appeal may decide that particular appeals will not be live-streamed. As in other Courts, the warning required by paragraph 15 below will apply. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEDIA 12. Representatives of the media may apply to the Court to receive remote access to Court proceedings by way oflive stream as an alternative to sitting in the courtroom. There is no entitlement to do so, and each case will be decided on its merits by the Appropriate Judicial Officer taking into account, inter alia, cost and practicality. If a live stream is available it will be accessible by way of the media portal on the Judicial Website and with use of a password and all parties to the proceedings in court shall be notified that live streaming has been permitted. 13. Applications from representatives of the media and others to observe a hearing remotely should be made in advance to allow for inclusion during hearing setup. Such applications should be made to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal), the Clerk of the Court, or such other person as they shall designate (the \\\"Administrative Officer\\\"). These applications will usually be considered at any case management hearing. OVERFLOW CASES 14. At the Court's discretion, live streaming may be permitted outside the courtroom but within the precincts of the Court to maximise public access. This may be in circumstances, for example, in a case of great public interest where the courtroom proves insufficient to accommodate all who wish to attend. If and when a public gallery is available elsewhere, the Judge or Magistrate may permit live streaming as an exceptional measure. It is not to be taken as the usual course when the public gallery in a courtroom cannot accommodate all who wish to attend. The open justice principle will usually be satisfied if there is public access to an open court. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 15. Where live streaming is available, recording of the stream is prohibited without express consent of the Court. Those allowed to observe a hearing remotely are reminded that it will be a contempt of court to make unauthorised recordings of the proceedings or to use or to allow the use of such recordings to interfere with the administration of justice. In keeping with section 111 of the Penal Code (as amended and revised) and established practice, where such proceedings are being live streamed, a warning note shall be included at the bottom of the screen in the course of the streaming to this effect: \\\"This is a formal court proceeding in respect of which the usual rules as set out in Practice Direction 1 of 2014 apply. No photographs, filming, recordings, or dissemination may be made except with the approval of the Court.\\\" RESTRICTIONS ON CASE INFORMATION IN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES 16. The Courts may hold proceedings in private and place restrictions on access to court documents or reporting when necessary, in the interests of the administration of justice or as otherwise prescribed by law. For example, names may be redacted in judgments, rulings, or orders. Cases in which the Courts' jurisdiction to hear evidence in private may be exercised and\/or redaction may be necessary include those where there is a risk of: 16.1. prejudicing law enforcement action or the administration of justice, (which includes risk of disruption); 16.2. affecting national security; 16.3. putting anyone's safety at risk; 16.4. identifying an anonymous witness. It is an offence to disclose information in contravention to a witness anonymity order pursuant to the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act (as amended and revised); 16.5. identifying young persons; 16.6. breaching the prohibition imposed by section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) upon the reporting of the identity of a complainant in a rape case; 16.7. breaching medical confidentiality; 16.8. breaching legal privilege; 16.9. contravening the protection of personal information (particularly in the case of the vulnerable) which is sensitive or if disclosed could give rise to a risk of harm; or 16.10. breaching a contempt of Court order. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Such decisions as to restrictions or redactions are judicial decisions and can only be taken on a case-by-case basis within legal proceedings. 17. A rationale for decisions protecting information that is sensitive or could give rise to a risk of harm or be damaging or would breach any right of confidence (especially for the vulnerable such as young persons or the mentally disabled) is that there is no obvious public interest in public disclosure. 18. In any case in which an embargo on the publication of open court proceedings is considered necessary for the proper administration of justice, the Court will give reasons, if practical in writing, and seek to ensure that the public and representatives of the press are notified of the embargo to avoid the risk of non-compliance. 19. Judges should consider at the end of each hearing, with a view to possible future requests for a recording, transcript, or inspection, whether a note should be made for the case file to indicate that redaction may be necessary. POSTPONEMENT OF REPORTING 20. In criminal cases, broadcasting or otherwise reporting on proceedings may be suspended in the interests of justice, for example, to prevent transmission to subsequent witnesses or otherwise compromise proceedings. 21. Subject to the limited exceptions to an open hearing (referred to in this Practice Direction) or as otherwise specified in relevant legislation, legal argument before a Judge will be held in public. It may be in the absence of the jury if there is one but in the presence of representatives of the media, and this will usually be subject to an order for delayed reporting. Where there is a jury, the Judge will usually order that media publication of this part of the proceedings (legal submissions in absence of jury) be postponed until the jury have reached their conclusion. This would usually be on the ground that there is a risk of substantial prejudice to the administration of justice because the jury might read about the submissions and be improperly influenced by them. PUBLIC NOTICE OF HEARINGS 22. An Administrative Officer shall no later than in the week before each hearing of an offence in the Grand Court and the day before each hearing of an offence in the Summary Court cause to be published on the Judicial Website and\/or in the public precincts of the Court a listing containing the following information in relation to cases: 22.1. The name of the defendant; 22.2. The Indictment or charge number, as appropriate; Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 22.3. The nature of the charge or indictment and of the hearing; 22.4. The court in which the hearing is to take place; 22.5. The name of the Judge or Magistrate assigned to that Court. 23. In the event that any matter is brought before a court in circumstances that make such publication impossible within the specified timeframe, the Administrative Officer shall cause publication to be made as soon as possible. PUBLICATION OF REGISTER OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS ON THE JUDICIAL WEBSITE\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_24\", \"num\": \"24.\", \"text\": \"Subject to redaction or other exclusion in the interests of justice or otherwise prescribed by law, directed or ordered in accordance with this Practice Direction, the following case information shall be published on the Judicial Website or otherwise be available to the public: 24.l. Charges and indictments; 24.2. Final orders, directions, rulings and judgments; 24.3. Applications for orders or directions (excluding factual material); 24.4. The dates of public hearings; 24.5. The Judge or Magistrate by whom a decision, order direction or judgment at a public hearing was made; 24.6. Summary of Allegations. EMBARGO OR RESTRICTION ON PUBLICATION\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_25\", \"num\": \"25.\", \"text\": \"[n cases in which a restriction on publication is prescribed by law (for example, in cases involving children) the prosecutor shall supply the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal) with a copy of the relevant document suitably redacted or anonymised to be published on the Judicial Website or otherwise.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_26\", \"num\": \"26.\", \"text\": \"In other cases, where a prosecutor or defendant seeks to omit, redact, anonymise or delay the publication of any information required by paragraph 22 or 24, that prosecutor shall apply in writing, providing to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal), in a timely manner, details of the proposed omission and\/or a draft of any proposed redaction or anonymisation and\/or what information should be subject to GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 delay in publication. The application should be accompanied by reasons that it is contrary to law or the interests of justice for the full information to be published or for there to be a delay in such publication. An Administrative Officer shall forthwith place the matter before the Appropriate Judicial Officer for decision. The Appropriate Judicial Officer shall consider the extent to which it is appropriate to allow timely representations from any other party and when and to whom reasons for the decision should be given. OFFICIAL RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_27\", \"num\": \"27.\", \"text\": \"A recording is deemed to be a document for the purposes of this Practice Direction.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_28\", \"num\": \"28.\", \"text\": \"A recording of proceedings will be kept in accordance with established court practices and the National Archives and Public Records Act (as amended and revised) as amended or revised and policies made thereunder.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_29\", \"num\": \"29.\", \"text\": \"Court stenographers are engaged to provide the verbatim records of proceedings in Grand Court in criminal cases. In Summary Court, the notes kept by the Chief Magistrate and Magistrates will continue to comprise the official record of procedures until an official digital recording system is engaged.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_30\", \"num\": \"30.\", \"text\": \"Transcripts in criminal appeals are provided to parties only where truly necessary for the preparation and presentation of an appeal. Preparation of transcripts is burdensome and costly. Neither the public nor the media has an entitlement to a transcript. Transcripts of criminal proceedings whether in the Grand Court or Summary Courts are not routinely made. See Practice Direction 3 of 2017 (Court Stenographer Services) and Court of Appeal Rules (as amended and revised) rule 33A.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_31\", \"num\": \"31.\", \"text\": \"Where transcripts of open court hearings are (I) available or (2) otherwise sought for good reason, copies (or extracts) may, subject to direction or order, be obtained on application to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal) explaining the purpose to which the transcript will be put and on payment of the prescribed fee. The Judge or Magistrate shall determine whether or not provision of the same will be disproportionately costly or burdensome. The Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal) shall keep a written record by way of receipt that a transcript has been provided and to whom and on what date. TEXT-BASED COMMUNICATIONS, RECORDINGS, PHOTOGRAPHS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_32\", \"num\": \"32.\", \"text\": \"Readers are reminded that the Practice Guidance issued with Practice Direction 1 of 2014 remains in force as amplified by this Practice Direction. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_33\", \"num\": \"33.\", \"text\": \"Unless otherwise specifically ordered, live text-based communications by legal commentators or registered representatives of the media for the sole purpose of fair and accurate reporting are permitted at all public heatings. Phones, laptops, and other electronic devices must be used silently. Unregistered representatives of the media and legal commentators shall be required to identify themselves as such before or at the outset of the relevant hearing and may be required to produce evidence of their status and identity. The Court shalI have discretion as to whether such status should be recognised and whether or not a proper journalistic or legal commentary purpose is served.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_34\", \"num\": \"34.\", \"text\": \"Other members of the public who wish to make records in this way must apply for permission to the Judge or Magistrate charged with the conduct of the hearing\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_35\", \"num\": \"35.\", \"text\": \"Except as set out above, mobile phones and other recording electronic devices must be switched off.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_36\", \"num\": \"36.\", \"text\": \"No sound recording may be taken except with the permission of the Judge or Magistrate charged with conduct of the hearing. Where appropriate the Judge or Magistrate may permit a legal commentator or registered representative of the media to record proceedings. In all cases in which a recording of proceedings is allowed, it shall be permitted only so long as it is used as an aide memoire to fair and accurate reporting; the recording must not be broadcast or used for any other purpose. It will be a matter for the Court to decide whether or not a proper journalistic or legal commentary purpose is served.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_37\", \"num\": \"37.\", \"text\": \"Photographs or other images, still or moving, in court or within the precincts of the court are not permitted. Jurors and vulnerable parties and witnesses, especially, must be protected from publicity. INSPECTING A COURT FILE BY AN ATTORNEY, DEFENDANT IN PERSON, OR YOUNG PERSON\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_38\", \"num\": \"38.\", \"text\": \"Where an attorney is on record for a defendant or a defendant acts in person, that person shall be allowed to review case documents, upon satisfying the Administrative Officer as to that person\u2019s status, without having to complete a formal application. In the event that a document is within the categories set out in paragraph 61 herein or by direction or order made in accordance with this Practice Direction redacted or otherwise excluded in the interests of justice or as prescribed by law, the Administrative Officer shall before such review consult with the Appropriate Judicial Officer as to the appropriate course. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_39\", \"num\": \"39.\", \"text\": \"An affected Young Person, that person\u2019s parents, legal guardian(s), other person in loco parentis and attorneys of record may inspect and\/or obtain copies of select Youth Court documents (or documents in other Court proceedings affecting the Young Person) by making application in writing in Form [l]. There may be a risk that the interests of another Young Person are thereby prejudiced and in such a case or in respect of any document that may fall within the categories set out in paragraph 61 herein, the Administrative Officer shall consult with the Appropriate Judicial Officer before granting the application. Photo identification and other documents deemed appropriate might be requested to confirm the identity of the applicant before allowing the viewing of a Youth Court document. Youth Court documents will not be emailed.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_40\", \"num\": \"40.\", \"text\": \"The Administrative Officer will arrange by agreement with the applicant a suitable and timely date and time to view case documents. PUBLIC ACCESS TO MATERIAL IN PROCEEDINGS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_41\", \"num\": \"41.\", \"text\": \"As set out in paragraphs 22 and 24 herein, information will be published on the Judicial Website. Application for other information and material may involve significant clerical and judicial time. The open justice principle is not unlimited and as explained there may be countervailing principles or rights that outweigh it in a particular case. Open justice forms part of the overriding principle that justice must be done. The principle serves two primary purposes: namely, to enable public scrutiny of court decisions and to enable the public to understand how the justice system works and why decisions are taken.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_42\", \"num\": \"42.\", \"text\": \"The Court does not itself retain all case documents. Some may, for example, be returned to the prosecution. Typically, the Court will return non-documentary exhibits, in particular, to the prosecution for retention in accordance with the Rules. Thus, access granted by the Court on application relates to court records, namely those records retained by the Court.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_43\", \"num\": \"43.\", \"text\": \"Not all records retained by the Court are accessible or disclosable. Materials may be disclosed in a case but not referenced in the proceedings, and so may not be accessible. Some records may have personal annotations made merely for ease of reference by the Judge or Magistrate; such annotations are therefore not accessible. Access will usually be granted to material actually seen or referred to in the course of the proceedings, including documents such as maps, photographs, CCTV footage, audio, and videotapes. Accessible documents may, with leave of the Court, include applications and supporting evidence for witness anonymity that may be appropriately redacted. They may also include skeleton arguments and written legal submissions that have been referred to in Court but may be redacted or anonymised by order of the Court upon representations from and with the involvement of counsel. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_44\", \"num\": \"44.\", \"text\": \"Where a witness has given evidence, observing the testimony given in open court is usually sufficient for open justice purposes. The written statement of the witness is not evidence and need not be provided. Parts of statements (and other documents) are often not read out because of their sensitive nature. Where a witness statement (or other document) has been referred to by the Judge or Magistrate and relied on for a ruling or conclusion but not read out, access to the Judgment will usually be sufficient for an understanding of the salient aspects of the witness statement.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_45\", \"num\": \"45.\", \"text\": \"It will be a matter for the Appropriate Judicial Officer to decide in such cases whether to provide the statement or other document (redacted or otherwise). Where the Appropriate Judicial Officer considers it appropriate, that Judicial Officer may permit a representative of the media to see the whole of a witness statement but only on the condition that those parts not read out (and not relied on) may not be used or reported.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_46\", \"num\": \"46.\", \"text\": \"A member of the public (including a representative of the media) may be permitted to take a photograph on a hand-held device of a document as a copy in lieu of photocopying on payment of a reasonable cost as may be prescribed. Redaction may be necessary and again a reasonable cost may be charged for the same. MEDIA ACCESS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_47\", \"num\": \"47.\", \"text\": \"Where possible, rulings that are likely to affect reporting should be decided at an early stage. The parties should if practicable raise any issue relating to restriction of access, redaction, or other limits on reporting at case management hearings, so that, should the media wish to challenge them, they may do so at the time.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_48\", \"num\": \"48.\", \"text\": \"Judges and Magistrates should, so long as it does not interfere with the administration of justice, give the media, on request, the opportunity to make representations on matters that are of importance to them. Where time permits, representations should be reduced to writing prior to oral submissions. In appropriate cases, the Court may allow a defendant to be heard on the issues, in which instance the procedure whenever determined may be treated as pait of the proceedings.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_49\", \"num\": \"49.\", \"text\": \"Making requests during the course of proceedings, particularly at a time of sensitive evidence, may be disruptive to the proceedings and place a great burden on the Court. It may also distress others. Representatives of the media have a responsibility to take this into account and minimise requests that may be time- consuming and distracting from the purpose of any hearing.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_50\", \"num\": \"50.\", \"text\": \"In complex or high-profile cases, Judges and Magistrates should consider at a case management hearing whether any special arrangements need to be made for media representation, including: 50.1. the provision or copying of relevant documents; 50.2. special seating arrangements; 50.3. overflow room facilities; and GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 50.4. how any day-to-day requests from the media may be managed without unnecessary interuption to the proceedings.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_51\", \"num\": \"51.\", \"text\": \"Representatives of the media should, if they wish for special arrangements to be made, submit written representations well in advance of the case management hearing and should be permitted to make oral representation at the hearing. APP LI CATIONS FOR SUPPLY OF INFORMATION ABOUT PROCEEDINGS\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_52\", \"num\": \"52.\", \"text\": \"Unless expressly otherwise specified in this Practice Direction, when by Form [2] addressed to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal) specifying, in particular, the information requested and shall pay any fee prescribed. A non-party applying for access to material must explain why such access will advance the open justice principle.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_53\", \"num\": \"53.\", \"text\": \"Such applications will be considered on their merit, taking into account the open justice principle and the imperative of avoiding disproportionately burdensome and costly disclosure. If the Court holds documents that have not been referenced in Court or adduced in evidence, these need not be disclosed. The public and representatives of the media are not entitled to see documents not referred to or used in open Court. The Administrative Officer may determine the identity and status of an unregistered applicant seeking case information or requesting inspection of case documents.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_54\", \"num\": \"54.\", \"text\": \"In all cases the open justice principle requires that all applications be dealt with in a timely manner.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_55\", \"num\": \"55.\", \"text\": \"These provisions are without prejudice to the paragraphs herein relating to Recording of Proceedings.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_56\", \"num\": \"56.\", \"text\": \"In appropriate circumstances, the Administrative Officer will- 56.1. supply to the applicant, by word-of-mouth or in writing, information about the case; or 56.2. allow the applicant to inspect or copy a document, or part of a document (on payment of the prescribed fee), containing information about the case.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_57\", \"num\": \"57.\", \"text\": \"Viewing case documents may be by inspection of hard copy, Zoom or other electronic communication or other means deemed by the court to be appropriate.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_58\", \"num\": \"58.\", \"text\": \"In any case the Court may determine an application: 58.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or 58.2. without a hearing. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Provision not requiring Written Application\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_59\", \"num\": \"59.\", \"text\": \"Provided that in a case in which the information sought is that set out in paragraphs 22 or 24 herein and for some reason the information is not still on the Judicial Website, the application may be oral. In such a case the Administrative Officer shall record on the case file the application, when and by whom it was made and the outcome of the application.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_60\", \"num\": \"60.\", \"text\": \"The Administrative Officer, subject to any direction or Court order to the contrary in respect of the same, shall supply-by word-of-mouth or by direction to the Judicial Website-information as to: 60.l. the date of any public hearing (unless any party has yet to be notified of that date); 60.2. the alleged offence, charge or indictment and any plea entered; 60.3. the court's decision in a public hearing; 60.4. the Judge or Magistrate by whom a decision, order, direction, or judgment at a public hearing was made; 60.5. whether the case is under appeal; 60.6. Summary of Allegations Closed materials\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_61\", \"num\": \"61.\", \"text\": \"The following documents shall not be open to inspection without written permission of the Appropriate Judicial Officer: 61.1. Public Interest Immunity material, so deemed by order of the Court; 61.2. A document that was sealed by current order of the Court at any stage in criminal proceedings; 61.3. Files relating to sexual offences and witness statements involving the evidence of witnesses in firearms cases. 61.4. Youth Court cases; 61.5. Witness statements of those subject to witness anonymity orders or in cases involving the same; 61.6. Letters or communications presented to the Judge or Magistrate for consideration but not adduced into evidence; 61.7. Medical, Probation or social enquiry reports; 61.8. Any other document that is not in the public domain; GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_62\", \"num\": \"62.\", \"text\": \"The Administrative Officer in any case to which paragraphs 16 or 61 herein apply or may apply shall seek direction from the Appropriate Judicial Officer.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_63\", \"num\": \"63.\", \"text\": \"Before permission for disclosure is given in such a case, opportunity shall be given to the Director of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make representations. Reasons for Refusal\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_64\", \"num\": \"64.\", \"text\": \"In refusing an application for disclosure the Appropriate Judicial Officer should give briefreasons and refer to: 64.1. The application; 64.2. The nature of the material requested; 64.3. Whether the application has 'legitimate journalistic purpose'; 64.4. The principle of open justice and relevant Constitutional Rights; 64.5. Any presumption in favour of disclosure; 64.6. The countervailing reasons against disclosure; 64.7. The refusal of the application; 64.8. The grounds for refusal. APPLICATIONS BY \\\"PERSONS AFFECTED\\\" PURSUANT TO SECTION 193 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_65\", \"num\": \"65.\", \"text\": \"Applicants are reminded that certain categories of information are published on the Judicial Website. Applications for provision of a copy of an order, ruling, judgment, deposition, or other part of a record of proceedings under the Code pursuant to section 193 of the Code shall be by Form [3] addressed to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal).\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_66\", \"num\": \"66.\", \"text\": \"The applicant shall therein identify the basis upon which that applicant applies as a person affected and provide such proof as is reasonably requested. The applicant should explain why the already published information is insufficient. The Administrative Officer shall, as appropriate, seek direction from the Appropriate Judicial Officer.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_67\", \"num\": \"67.\", \"text\": \"The Administrative Officer shall thereafter provide the document or record to a person affected so long as that Administrative Officer is satisfied or directed that such provision is in the interests of justice and is not otherwise precluded by law. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_68\", \"num\": \"68.\", \"text\": \"In any case to which paragraph 61 applies, before the Appropriate Judicial Officer grants permission to provide the information, opportunity shall be given to the Director of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make representations.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_69\", \"num\": \"69.\", \"text\": \"In any case, the Court may determine an application: 69.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or 69.2. without a hearing. TIMELINE\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_70\", \"num\": \"70.\", \"text\": \"Pursuant to this Practice Direction case information will be published on the Judicial Website and thus publicly available. The timeline for dealing with applications in respect of other information or documents will be on a case-by-case basis depending on the circumstances, the nature of what is sought, and the judicial and clerical time required for consideration of the applications. The Court will endeavour to grant permitted access promptly and within 2-5 days of receipt of an application will notify the applicant of the status of the application.\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}, {\"eId\": \"sec_71\", \"num\": \"71.\", \"text\": \"This Practice Direction supersedes Practice Directions No. 2 of 2015, entitled \\\"Applications for Inspection of Criminal Court Files, Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised)\\\", and (insofar as they relate to criminal proceedings) Practice Direction 8 of 2020 entitled, \\\"Public Access to Court Proceedings by Audio or Video Links\\\". Nothing in this Practice Direction shall be taken to affect Rule 14 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019. Practice Direction l of2014 (Use of portable cameras, recording and electronic devices in court buildings) remains in force. 10 October 2022 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form [1] Form for Application for Inspection or Copies of Non-Public Material in Youth Court and Related Criminal Cases Practice Direction 6 of 2022 [Paragraphs 39 & 61] Part A: To Be Completed by Applicant I    Title of the Case which is the Subject of this Application: II   Status of Applicant: 1.  \u25a1 An Affected Young Person 3.  \u25a1 A Legal Guardian 2.  \u25a1 The Parent of an Affected Young Person 4.  \u25a1Another Person \\\"in Loco Parentis\\\" 5.  \u25a1 The Attorney of Record III  Photo Identification Provided: 1.  \u25a1Driver's Licence:#___________________, or 2.  \u25a1 Passport: Country of Issue: __________________________    # __________________, or 3.  \u25a1 Other accepted identification: IV   Application for Youth Court Document\/s: The Purpose of this Application is to 1.   \u25a1 Inspect, and\/or 2.   \u25a1 Obtain copy\/ies Details of the Requested Youth Court Document\/s: 1. ______________________________________________________________________ 2. ______________________________________________________________________ 3. ______________________________________________________________________ V Application for General Criminal Case Document\/s Affecting the Young Person: The Purpose of this Application is to 1. \u25a1 Inspect, and\/or 2. \u25a1Obtain copy\/ies Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Details of the D Summary Court or D Grand Court Document\/s Affecting the Young Person: 1.  ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2.  ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3.  ____________________________________________________________________________________ Part B: To Be Completed by the*Administrative Officer & Signed by*Appropriate Judicial Officer I. *Name of Administrative Officer: ___________________________________  (*See Directions 6\/2022, paragraph 13) II. Title of Administrative Officer: ____________________________________________________ III. I have certified that the requested document\/s fall within the categories set out in paragraph 61 of Practice Direction No. 6 of 2022:  \u25a1Yes   \u25a1No IV.   Date Arranged for Provision of or Viewing of Requested Documents: ______________________________________________________________________________ (Please note that Youth Court documents cannot be emailed) V. In the case of documents included in the categories set out in paragraph 61 of Practice Direction No. 6 of 2022, I hereby undertake to consult with the Appropriate Judicial Officer. VI. Upon Consultation, the *Appropriate Judicial Officer: l. has approved \u25a1 provision and\/or \u25a1 viewing of the following document\/s: i.   ________________________________________________________ ii.  ________________________________________________________ iii. ________________________________________________________ AND\/OR 2. has denied \u25a1  provision and\/or \u25a1 viewing of the following document\/s: i.   ________________________________________________________ ii.  ________________________________________________________ iii. ________________________________________________________ ___________________________ Signature Administrative Officer ___________________________ Signature of* Appropriate Judicial Officer (See paragraph 4, Practice Directions 6\/2022) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form [2] Procedures for Application for Information about a Case Practice Direction 6 of 2022 [Paragraph 22, 24, 52 & 60] Part 1 For Information of Applicant I  Case Information Not Requiring Written Application: Subject to any court direction or order to the contrary, information about case aspects listed in paragraphs 22, 24, 52, 57, and paragraph 60 of this Practice Direction \u2014 i) may be requested and provided by word-of-mouth, including by direction to www.Judicial.ky, and ii) in appropriate cases, hard copies of documents may be inspected or viewed via Zoom or other electronic communication, or other means deemed appropriate by the Court, on payment of the prescribed fee. II   To Be Completed by Applicant A. Title of case subject to the above listed paragraphs: ___________________________________ B. Title Date of application: _______________ C. Title Name of applicant: _____________________ For information of applicant: In appropriate cases, the application may be referred to the Appropriate Judicial Officer, who may decide the application at a hearing: in public; in p1ivate; or without a hearing. ______________________________________________________________________________________ For Official Completion A. Prescribed fee paid: \u25a1Yes    \u25a1No. B. Outcome of application: \u25a1Granted     \u25a1Not Granted C. Reason for not granting application: _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Part 2 Case Information Requiring Written Application: \\\"Closed Material\\\" requiring written application for disclosure by means of this form is detailed in paragraphs 9, 16, 61, 68 & 70 of this Practice Direction. To Be Completed by the Deputy Clerk of Court Criminal In these cases, the following actions and information shall be recorded via this Form by the Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal): Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 A. Title of the case which is the subject of application for \\\"Closed Information\\\": ______________________________________________________________________________________ B. Name of applicant: __________________________________________________________________ C. Status of applicant: \u25a1Party to the case \u25a1Non-Party to case, including registered member of media D. Identity and status of unregistered non-party to the case: _______________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ E. Explanation as to reason case access would advance the Open Justice principle: ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ F. Was the requested information referenced in court and\/or introduced into evidence: \u25a1Yes \u25a1No G. Following referral to the Appropriate Judicial Officer, the application was decided \u2014 \u25a1at a hearing:  \u25a1in public; \u25a1in private; or \u25a1without a hearing. H. Before permission for disclosure is given in such a case, opportunity has been given to the Director of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make representations: \u25a1Yes \u25a1No I.   Upon subsequent direction by the Appropriate Judicial Officer or Court order, the Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal) may, respectively \u2014 i)   supply the applicant with information about the case \u2014 \u25a1in writing; or \u25a1the applicant may inspect, copy, or view via Zoom or other electronic communication, or other means deemed appropriate by the Court, on payment of a *prescribed fee. ii)  \u25a1not supply the information J.   Reasons for non-disclosure: In refusing an application for disclosure the Appropriate Judicial Officer shall refer to paragraph 64 and provide a brief summary of reasons for non- disclosure: __________________________________________________________________________________________ K. Timeliness of response to application: Response was made \u2014 \u25a1within 2-5 days' of application; \u25a1within _____ days. Reason for delay: ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ *Prescribed Fee Paid: \u25a1Yes   \u25a1No GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Form [3] Practice Direction 6 of 2022 [Paragraphs 24 & 65 to 70] Application by Persons Affected Pursuant to Section 193 of Criminal Procedure Code For Copy\/ies of An Order, Ruling, Judgment, Deposition, or Other Part of a Record of Proceedings Form to be Submitted to the Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal) Part A: Details of Application I.   Title of the Case that Is the Subject of this Application: ______________________________________________________________________________ II.  Name of applicant ______________________________________________________________ III. Procedures for Consideration of Application by Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal): 1. Status as an \\\"affected person\\\": i)   \u25a1 has provided proof ii) \u25a1 has not provided proof 2. Applicant's evidence of insufficiency of information available on register of criminal proceedings: i)  \u25a1 has provided credible evidence; ii) \u25a1 has not provided credible evidence. Part B: Details of Outcome I. Upon consultation by the Deputy Clerk, the Appropriate Judicial Officer decided the application: i)  \u25a1 At a public hearing ii) \u25a1 At a private hearing iii)\u25a1 Without a hearing II. Representations Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 III. The Appropriate Judicial Officer ruled that disclosure: i)  \u25a1 is in the interest of Open Justice; ii) \u25a1 is not in the interest of Open Justice. iii)\u25a1 is prohibited by law. IV. Timeline 1. Information was provided to the applicant within: i)  \u25a1 2 to 5 days of.application ii) \u25a1 Other: 2. Delay in response due to: i)  \u25a1 Nature of request ii) \u25a1 Judicial and clerical time required ____________________________________________ Signature Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 McKENZIE FRIENDS (CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS) 1) This Practice Direction applies to civil and family proceedings in the Grand Court and to Family Proceedings in the Summary Courts. It does not apply in criminal cases. It is issued as guidance by the Chief Justice. It is intended to remind courts and litigants of the principles set out in the case authorities and does not change the law. It is issued in light of the increase in personal litigants at all levels of the civil and family courts and in conjunction with the Guide to proceedings in the Grand Court for people without a legal representative, published on the same date. Both are available on the Courts' website at www.judicial.ky. Reasonable assistance from a McKenzie Friend 2) There is a presumption in favour of permitting a personal litigant to have reasonable assistance from a layperson, sometimes called a McKenzie Friend, a term which has come to be associated with the case of McKenzie v McKenzie1. Personal litigants assisted by McKenzie Friends remain litigants in person. McKenzie Friends have no independent right to provide assistance. They have no right to act as advocates or to carry out the conduct of litigation but may attend as a friend to lend support as explained below. A person who has legal training but has not been engaged as an attorney may serve as a McKenzie friend.2 What McKenzie Friends may do 3) McKenzie Friends may: i) provide moral support for personal litigants; ii) take notes with the permission of the judge; iii) help with case papers; iv) quietly give advice on any aspect of the conduct of the case which is being heard. What McKenzie Friends may not do 4) McKenzie Friends may not: i) Conduct the litigation, acting as the personal litigant's agent in relation to the proceedings; ii) Manage the personal litigant's cases outside court, for example by signing court documents; or 1 [1970] 3 All R. 1034 at 1336 2 See McKenzie v McKenzie (above) a Constable v Constable [20181, Court of Appeal Bermuda, 10 October 2019. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 iii) Exercise a right of audience by addressing the court, making oral submissions or examining witnesses unless this has, in very exceptional circumstances, been authorised by the court. It is a criminal offence to exercise rights of audience or to conduct litigation unless properly qualified and authorised to do so as an attorney or as an officer of an incorporated entity. At present there are no statutorily prescribed exceptions or circumstances in which a McKenzie Friend can apply for rights of audience or to conduct litigation for reward on behalf of another person. Confidentiality 5) A McKenzie Friend must observe strict confidentiality in relation to any documents they have sight of and any information they hear in relation to the proceedings. Breach of such confidentiality will usually amount to a contempt of court, giving rise to sanctions including a fine and imprisonment. Exercising the Right to Reasonable Assistance 6) While personal litigants ordinarily have a right to receive reasonable assistance from McKenzie Friends the court retains the power to refuse to permit the giving of such assistance. The refusal may occur on initial application or at any time during the hearing. 7) A personal litigant may be denied the assistance of a McKenzie Friend or a particular McKenzie Friend because its provision might undermine or has undermined the efficient administration of justice. Illustrations of circumstances where this might arise, which are not exhaustive, are: i) the assistance is being provided for an improper purpose; ii) the assistance is unreasonable in nature or degree; iii) the McKenzie Friend is subject to an order such as a civil proceedings order or a civil restraint order or has been declared to be a vexatious litigant; by a court in the Cayman Islands; iv) the McKenzie Friend is using the case to promote that person\u2019s own cause or interests or those of some other person, group or organisation, and not the interests of the personal litigant; v) the McKenzie Friend is directly or indirectly conducting the litigation; vi) the court is not satisfied that the McKenzie Friend fully understands and will comply with the duty of confidentiality. 8) The following factors are NOT of themselves sufficient to justify the court refusing to permit a McKenzie Friend to assist a personal litigant: GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (i) The case or application is simple or straightforward, or is, for instance, a directions or case management hearing; (ii) The personal litigant appears capable of conducting the case without assistance; (iii) The personal litigant is unrepresented through choice; (iv) The other party is not represented; (v) The proposed McKenzie Friend belongs to an organisation that promotes a particular cause; (vi) The proceedings are confidential and the court papers contain sensitive information relating to a family's affairs 9) A personal litigant who wishes to exercise this right should inform the judge as soon as possible indicating the identity of the proposed McKenzie Friend. The proposed McKenzie Friend should produce a short curriculum vitae or other statement setting out relevant experience, confirming that that personal litigant has no personal interest in the case and understands the McKenzie Friend's role and the duty of confidentiality. 10) The court may refuse to allow a personal litigant to exercise the right to receive assistance at the start of a hearing. The court may also circumscribe or remove the right during the course of a hearing, where the court forms the view that a McKenzie Friend, or a particular McKenzie Friend, may give, has given, or is giving, assistance that impedes the efficient administration of justice. The court may in the first instance issue a firm and unequivocal warning to the personal litigant and\/or McKenzie Friend. It is likely that the court may give reasons for refusal and the personal litigant, but not the McKenzie Friend, has a right to appeal the decision. 11) Where a personal litigant is receiving assistance from a McKenzie Friend in care proceedings, the court should consider the desirability of the McKenzie Friend's attendance at any joint consultations directed by the court and, if that personal litigant is to attend, the most effective and appropriate way in which that person should be involved in the joint consultation, bearing in mind the limits of their role, and should give directions accordingly. Personal litigants are in general permitted to communicate any information, including filed evidence, relating to the proceedings to McKenzie Friends for the purpose of obtaining advice or assistance in relation to the proceedings. In the case of proceedings involving children, however, this may only be done with the permission of the judge to avoid contravening provisions of the Children Act. This requires an application to the judge for permission and if the judge grants it then ordinarily conditions will be imposed giving further protection to confidentiality. Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 12) Legal representatives of other parties should ensure that documents are served on personal litigants in good time to enable them to seek assistance regarding their content from McKenzie Friends in advance of any hearing or case management meeting. Remuneration 13) Personal litigants can enter into lawful agreements to pay certain fees to McKenzie Friends for the provision of reasonable assistance in court or out of court by, for instance, carrying out clerical or mechanical activities, such as photocopying documents, preparing bundles, delivering documents to opposing parties or the court. 14) Such fees are recoverable, in principle, from the opposing party as a recoverable disbursement upon taxation: Grand Court Rules Order 62 rules 19(1) and 19(2). 10 October, 20223 3 This Practice Direction is adopted and adapted, with thanks, from similar directions issued by the High Court of Northern Ireland. GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Publication in consolidated form authorised by the Cabinet this 30th day of January, 2024. Kim Bullings Clerk of the Cabinet Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) ENDNOTES Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 ENDNOTES Table of Practice Directions (includes superseded\/revoked): SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication 46\/2022 PD 7\/22 McKenzie Friends (Civil and Family Courts) Current 13-Oct-22 LG40\/2022\/s4 13-Oct-22 34\/2022 PD 6\/22 Public Access to Criminal Courts Current 13-Oct-22 LG40\/2022\/s3 13-Oct-22 38\/2022 PD 5\/22 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Proceedings Under Section 7 of the Legal Practitioners Act (2022 Revision) Current 31-Aug-22 LG35\/2022\/s1 1-Sep-22 34\/2022 PD 4\/22 Listing of Civil Proceedings in the Civil Division, Short Summonses and Assigned Judges Current 19-Aug-22 LG32\/2022\/s2 19-Aug-22 33\/2022 PD 3\/22 Judicial Mediation Guidelines Current 19-Aug-22 LG32\/2022\/s1 19-Aug-22 16\/2022 PD 2\/22 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Current 13-Apr-22 LG16\/2022\/s1 14-Apr-22 15\/2022 PD 1\/22 Listings and Custody Time Limits in Criminal Matters Current 14-Apr-22 LG16\/2022\/s1 14-Apr-22 91\/2021 PD 5\/14 (Amended) (Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013) Current 21-Jan-21 GE102\/2021\/s1 15-Dec-21 83\/2021 PD 3\/21 Practice Direction Exhibits in Criminal Cases Current 30-Nov-21 LG68\/2021\/s1 30-Nov-21 44\/2021 PD 2\/21 Court Fees Rules (2021 Revision) (\u201cthe Rules\u201d) GCR Order 62 Rule 3(1) Current 7-May-21 GE39\/2021\/s1 7-May-21 90\/2021 PD 1\/21 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Revoked1 30-Apr-21 GE37\/2021\/s3 30-Apr-21 42\/2021 PD 11\/20 Electronic Filing (E-Filing) and E-Service in the Grand Court of documents via the Judicial Administration E-Filing Platform Current 8-Jan-20 GE1\/2021\/s1 6-Jan-21 PD 10\/20 1. Drawing up and Filing of Judgments and Orders 2. Form of Orders made by the Court Approved as to Form and Content or with the Consent of the Parties 3. Provision of Orders of the Court by the Clerk of Court Current 2-Oct-20 GE83\/2020\/s1 2-Oct-20 ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication PD 9\/20 Guidance for the remote notarisation and attestation of documents by electronic means Current 5-May-20 GE38\/2020\/s2 5-May-20 PD 8\/20 Public Access to Court Proceedings by Audio or Video Links During the Covid 19 Pandemic Superseded2 5-May-20 GE38\/2020\/s1 5-May-20 PD 7\/20 Sittings of the Court of Appeal by way of videoconference in response to the Covid Regulations, 2020 Current 14-Apr-20 GE30\/2020\/s2 14-Apr-20 PD 6A\/20 FSD Modifying Standard Hearing Practice During Pandemic Current 8-May-20 GE39\/2020\/s2 8-May-20 PD 6\/20 FSD Modifying Standard Remote Hearing Practice During Coronavirus Pandemic Current 14-Apr-20 GE30\/2020\/s1 14-Apr-20 PD 5E\/20 Electronic filing of Charges Reports from the Royal Cayman Islands Police Services (RCIPS) Current 3-Jun-20 GE45\/2020\/s2 3-Jun-20 PD 5D\/20 Electronic Filing of Tickets from Department of Commerce and Investment Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s8 9-Apr-20 PD 5C\/20 Electronic Filing of Court Reports from Department of Community Rehabilitation Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s7 9-Apr-20 PD 5B\/20 Electronic Filing of Court Reports from ODPP Current 3-Jun-20 GE45\/2020\/s1 3-Jun-20 PD 5B\/20 Electronic Filing of Court Reports from ODPP Superseded3 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s6 9-Apr-20 PD 5A\/20 Family Registry Electronic Filing of Court Reports From DCFS Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s5 9-Apr-20 PD 5\/20 Use of Emails for Filing, Electronic Signatures, Court Seals and Stamps Revoked4 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s4 9-Apr-20 PD 4\/20 Family Division Remote Hearings Family Mention Days Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s3 9-Apr-20 PD 3\/20 Family Division Remote Hearings Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s2 9-Apr-20 PD 2\/20 Covid 19 Guidance for the Family Division Current 9-Apr-20 GE29\/2020\/s1 9-Apr-20 PD 1\/20 Mediation Information and Assessment Rules 2020 Current 8-May-20 GE39\/2020\/s2 8-May-20 56\/2019 PD 4\/19 Criminal procedure unfit to plead or not guilty by reason of insanity Current 30-Oct-19 GE75\/2019\/s1 30-Oct-19 55\/2019 PD 3\/19 Proceedings in Family Division Costs Estimates Current 9-Oct-19 GE69\/2019\/s1 9-Oct-19 54\/2019 PD 2\/19 Adoption of Judicial Insolvency Network Modalities For Court To Court Commun-ications Current 1-Aug-19 G17\/2019\/s1 19-Aug-19 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) ENDNOTES Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication 53\/2019 PD 1\/19 Directions for Proceedings brought under s238 Companies Law Current 23-Aug-19 GE56\/2019\/s1 23-Aug-19 28\/2018 PD 1\/18 Court-to-court Communications and cooperation in cross-border insolvency and restructuring cases Current 30-Jul-18 G16\/2018\/s1 30-Jul-18 69\/2017 PD 4\/17 Filing of Winding Up Petitions Current 14-Aug-17 G17\/2017\/s4 14-Aug-17 687201 PD 3\/17 Court Stenographer Services Current 14-Aug-17 G17\/2017\/s3 14-Aug-17 67\/2017 PD 2\/17 Registration of Foreign Maintenance Orders Current 14-Aug-17 G17\/2017\/s2 14-Aug-17 66\/2017 PD 1\/17 Payments into Court of Trust Funds Current 14-Aug-17 G17\/2017\/s1 14-Aug-17 23\/2016 PD 2\/16 Mediation Information and Assessment Rules, 2016 Revoked5 14-Jun-16 G43\/2016\/s1 1-Jun-16 7\/2016 PD 1\/16 Financial Services Division Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Revoked6 15-Feb-16 G6\/2016\/s4 14-Mar-16 PD 1\/16 Financial Services Division Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Superseded7 15-Feb-16 GE10\/2016\/s5 12-Feb-16 36\/2015 PD 6\/15 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Revoked8 10-Aug-15 GE60\/2015\/s5 12-Aug-15 35\/2015 PD 5\/15 Cayman Islands Summary Court Criminal Case Management Current 1-Sep-15 GE60\/2015\/s4 12-Aug-15 34\/2015 PD 4\/15 Taking Evidence From Witnesses, Affiants And Deponents Who Do Not Speak English Current 12-Aug-15 GE60\/2015\/s3 12-Aug-15 33\/2015 PD 3\/15 List of Approved Real Estate Appraisers Current 12-Aug-15 GE60\/2015\/s2 12-Aug-15 7\/2015 PD 2\/15 Applications for inspection of Criminal Court Files - Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2013 Revision) Superseded9 16-Mar-15 G6\/2015\/s2   16-Mar-15 4\/2015 PD 1\/15 Applications for Sealing Court Orders and Inspecting Court Files (Civil) (As Amended July 2015) Current 12-Aug-15 GE60\/2015\/s1 12-Aug-15 ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication 31\/2014 PD 16\/14 International Child Abduction (Including 1980 Hague Convention) Current 30-Jun-14 G13\/2014\/s4 30-Jun-14 30\/2014 PD 15\/14 Inherent Jurisdiction (Including Wardship) Proceedings Current 30-Jun-14 G13\/2014\/s3 30-Jun-14 22\/2014 PD 14\/14 Direct Communication with a Judge in a Foreign Court Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s9 14-May-14 21\/2014 PD 13\/14 Contribution Orders Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s8 14-May-14 20\/2014 PD 12\/14 Arrival of Children in Grand Cayman by Air Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s7 14-May-14 19\/2014 PD 11\/14 Court Bundles in Family Proceedings Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s6 14-May-14 18\/2014 PD 10\/14 Court Welfare Officers Report Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s5 14-May-14 17\/2014 PD 9\/14 Committal for Contempt of Court Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s4 14-May-14 16\/2014 PD 8\/14 Taking Evidence from Non-English Speakers Revoked10 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s3 14-May-14 15\/2014 PD 7\/14 Remand Proceedings by way of teleconference Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s2 14-May-14 14\/2014 PD 6\/14 Summary Court Applications on weekends and Public Holidays Current 14-May-14 GE33\/2014\/s1 14-May-14 5\/2014 PD 5\/14 (Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013) Superseded1 10-Feb-14 G3\/2014\/s1 10-Feb-14 4\/2014 PD 4\/14 Orders For Sales by Private Treaty pursuant to Sections 75 and 77 of the Registered Land Law (2004 Revision) Current 28-Jan-14 G2\/2014\/s4 28-Jan-14 3\/2014 PD 3\/14 Jury Trials (SL 3 of 2014) Current 28-Jan-14 G2\/2014\/s3 28-Jan-14 2\/2014 PD 2\/14 Communications Between Counsel And The Court Etc. Current 28-Jan-14 G2\/2014\/s2 28-Jan-14 6\/2014 PC 1\/14 Practice Circular - Requirement for Strict Compliance with Court Orders Made In the Family Division of the Grand Court Current 10-Feb-14 G3\/2014\/s2 10-Feb-14 1\/2014 PD 1\/14 Practice Guidance use of Portable Cameras, Recording and Electronic Devices Current 28-Jan-14 G2\/2014\/s1 28-Jan-14 45\/2013 PD 4\/13 Pre-Action Protocol For Judicial Review  Current 2-Aug-17 GE63\/2017\/S3 2-Aug-17 44\/2013 PD 3\/13 Procedure for Hearing of Winding up Petitions Current 27-Sep-13 GE78\/2013\/s2 27-Sep-13 43\/2013 PD 2\/13 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Current 27-Sep-13 GE78\/2013\/s1 27-Sep-13 17\/2013 PD 1\/13 Consent Orders In Ancillary Relief Proceedings Current 1-May-13 G8\/2013\/s1 22-Apr-13 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) ENDNOTES Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication 90\/2012 PD 7\/12 Payment Schedules - Authorised Signatories Current 1-Dec-12 49\/2012 PD 6\/12 Listing of Family Law Proceedings and Memo from Chief Justice Current 8-Oct-12 G21\/2012\/s2 8-Oct-12 PC 6\/12 Practice Circular - Memorandum 48\/2012 PD 5\/12 Applications under the Registered Land Law Current 8-Oct-12 G21\/2012\/s1 8-Oct-12 15\/2012 PD 4\/12 Limited Admission as an Attorney-atLaw Current 26-Mar-12 G7\/2012\/s7 26-Mar-12 14\/2012 PD 3\/12 Attire for proceedings in the Grand Court Current 26-Mar-12 G7\/2012\/s6 26-Mar-12 13\/2012 PD 2\/12 Proceedings in the Grand Court in which the Judge Presides from Overseas Current 26-Mar-12 G7\/2012\/s5 26-Mar-12 12\/2012 PD 1\/12 Delivery of Reserved Judgments Current 26-Mar-12 G7\/2012\/s4 26-Mar-12 9\/2011 PD 1\/11 Guidelines Relating to the Taxation of Costs 23-May-11 G11\/2011\/s1 23-May-11 30\/2010 PD 2\/10 Schemes of Arrangements  and Compromise under Section 86 of the Companies Law Current 1-Oct-10 G20\/2010\/s2 27-Sep-10 29\/2010 PD 1\/10 Procedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial Services Proceedings Revoked12 27-Sep-10 G20\/2010\/s1 27-Sep-10 26\/2008 PD 1\/08 Register of Judgments Register of Writs Current 8-Dec-08 G25\/2008\/s2 8-Dec-08 4\/2006 PD 2\/06 Orders Revoked13 PD 1\/06 Liquidators' Renumeration Revoked14 3\/2004 PD 2\/04 Proceedings by way of Video Conferencing Civil or Criminal Current 2\/2004 PD 1\/04 Correction of Judgements and Amended Index of Practice Directions, to replace the current index Current 5-Apr-04 G7\/2004\/s1 5-Apr-04 PD 2\/03 Remuneration of Official Liquidators Revoked15 G26\/2003\/s1 ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication PD 1\/03 Official Liquidators: Security for the due performance of their duties Revoked16 GE\/2009\/s2 22-Jan-09 PD 1\/02 Schemes of Arrangement and Compromise under the Companies Law Revoked17 PD 1\/01 Guidelines relating to the Taxation of Costs Current 1-Jun-2011 G11\/2011\/s2 23-May-11 PD 1\/00 Listing Forms Current G1\/2000\/s1 4-Jan-00 PD 5\/99 Legal Aid - Affidavit of Means Current G24\/1999\/s1 22-Nov-99 PD 4\/99 Indictments Current G12\/1999\/s7 7-Jun-99 PD 3\/99 Short Summons List Revoked18 G5\/1999\/s9 1-Mar-99 PD 2\/99 Drawing Up and Filing of Judgments and Orders Revoked19 G4\/1999\/s9 15-Feb-99 PD 1\/99 Filing Documents in Court Current G4\/1999\/s8 15-Feb-99 PD 1\/98 Short Summons List Revoked20 PD 3\/97 Confidentiality and Publication of Chamber's Proceedings Current G16\/2003\/s17 11-Aug-03 PD 2\/97 Register of Judgments and Register of Writs, etc. Current G10\/1997\/s5 12-May-97 PD 1\/97 Legal Aid Forms Current G10\/1997\/s4 12-May-97 PD 3\/96 Formal Orders in Grand Court Revoked21 G7\/1996\/s6 1-Apr-96 PD 2\/96 Trial Bundles Current G7\/1996\/s5 1-Apr-96 PD 1\/96 Land Acquisition Law (Revised) \u2013 Payment of Compensation into Court Current G2\/1996\/s11 1-Apr-96 PD 5\/95 Trial Bundles Current 22-Jan-96 G2\/1996\/s9 22-Jan-96 PD 4\/95 Payment Schedules \u2013 Authorised Signatures Revoked22 22-Jan-96 G2\/1996\/s8 22-Jan-96 PD 3\/95 Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Method of Payment Current 1-May-95 GE9\/1995\/s10 1-May-95 PD 2\/95 Attachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Calculation of Post-Judgment Interest Current 1-May-95 GE9\/1995\/s9 1-May-95 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) ENDNOTES Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 SL # PD\/C # Practice Direction\/Circular Status Commence -ment Gazette Publication PD 1\/95 Arrangements for Listing of Chamber Summonses Revoked23 1-May-95 GE9\/1995\/s8 1-May-95 1 PD 1  of 2021 Revoked by  PD 2  of 2022 2 PD 8  of 2020 Superseded by PD 6 of 2022 (insofar as it relates to criminal matters) 3 PD 5B of 2020 Superseded by republication of PD5B of 2020 in GE45\/2020\/s1 4 PD 5  of 2020 Revoked by  PD 11  of 2020 5 PD 2  of 2016 Revoked by  PD 1  of 2020 6 PD 1  of 2016 Revoked by  PD 1  of 2021 7 PD 1 of 2016 Superseded by  republication of PD1 of 2016 in G6\/2016\/s4 8 PD 6  of 2015 Revoked by  PD 1  of 2016 9 PD 2  of 2015 Superseded by PD 6 of 2022 10 PD 8  of 2014 Revoked by  PD 4  of 2015 11 PD 5  of 2014 Amended by PD 5 (Amended) (GE102\/2021\/s2) and Superseded  by  PD 2  of 12 PD 1 of 2010 Revoked by  PD 2  of 2013 13 PD 2 of 2006 Revoked by  PD 10 of 2020 14 PD 1 of 2006 Revoked by  GC (Amdt No.2)Rules 2008,R. 3(2) (GE5\/2009\/s2) 15 PD 2 of 2003 Revoked by  PD 1 of 2006 16 PD 1 of 2003 Revoked by  GC (Amdt No.2) Rules 2008, R.3(1) (GE5\/2009\/s2) 17 PD 1 of 2002 Revoked by  PD 2 of 2010 18 PD 3 of 1999 Revoked by ______ 19 PD 2 of 1999 Revoked by PD 10 of 2020 20 PD 1 of 1998 Revoked by PD 3 of 1999 21 PD 3 of 1996 Revoked by  ______ 22 PD 4 of 1995 Revoked by PD 7 of 2012 23 PD 1 of 1995 Revoked by PD 3 of 1999 ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) ENDNOTES Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 ENDNOTES Grand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation) Consolidated as at 31st December, 2023 (Price: $83.20)\", \"element\": \"section\", \"heading\": null}], \"meta\": {\"notes\": null, \"workflow\": null, \"lifecycle\": {\"source\": \"#cilegis\", \"eventRef\": [{\"eId\": \"e_commence_2024_01_01\", \"date\": \"2024-01-01\", \"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_2024_01_01\", \"timeInterval\": [{\"end\": null, \"start\": \"#e_commence_2024_01_01\", \"duration\": null, \"refersTo\": \"#inForce\"}]}]}, \"classification\": null, \"identification\": {\"source\": \"#cilegis\", \"FRBRWork\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2024-01-01\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/!main\", \"FRBRalias\": [{\"name\": \"cmsId\", \"value\": \"2003-0034\"}], \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRnumber\": \"34 of 2003\", \"FRBRcountry\": \"ky\", \"FRBRsubtype\": \"subordinate\"}, \"FRBRExpression\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2024-01-01\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01\/!main\", \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRlanguage\": \"eng\"}, \"FRBRManifestation\": {\"FRBRuri\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01.xml\", \"FRBRdate\": [{\"date\": \"2026-06-22\", \"name\": \"generation\"}], \"FRBRthis\": \"\/akn\/ky\/act\/sl\/2003\/34\/eng@2024-01-01.xml\", \"FRBRauthor\": [{\"as\": \"#editor\", \"href\": \"\/akn\/ontology\/canary\/organization\/editor\/cilegis\"}], \"FRBRformat\": \"application\/xml\"}}}, \"name\": \"act\", \"header\": {\"title\": \"Grand Court Practice Directions\", \"actNumber\": \"34 of 2003\", \"longTitle\": null}}, \"doc\": null, \"bill\": null, \"judgment\": null}}","akn_full_text":"CAYMAN ISLANDS\n\nGrand Court Act\n(2015 Revision)\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS\n (2024 Consolidation)\n\nSupplement No. 1 published with Legislation Gazette No. 6 of 7th February, 2024.\n(Published in electronic format only)\n\n\u2000\n\nPage 2\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nPUBLISHING DETAILS\n  The Practice Directions and Circulars made by the Chief Justice, the Grand Court Rules\nCommittee, the Court of Appeals Rules Committee and the Insolvency Rules Committee\nand as amended by Law 56 of 2020.\n\nAs consolidated \u2014\nPD 2 of 1995-1st May, 1995\nPD 3 of 1995-1st May, 1995\nPD 5 of 1995-15th December, 1995\nPD 1 of 1996-5th January, 1996\nPD 2 of 1996-7th March, 1996\nPD 1 of 1997-1st April, 1997\nPD 2 of 1997-9th April, 1997\nPD 3 of 1997-11th August, 1997\nPD 1 of 1999-28th January, 1999\nPD 2 of 1999-28th January, 1999\nPD 4 of 1999-26th June, 1999\nPD 5 of 1999-27th October, 1999\nPD 1 of 2000-__December, 1999\nPD 1 of 2001-22nd October, 2001\nPD 1 of 2004-17th March, 2004\nPD 2 of 2004-26th May, 2004\nPD 2 of 2006-24th October, 2006\nPD 1 of 2008-31st October, 2008\nPD 2 of 2010-17th September, 2010\nPD 1 of 2011-14th April, 2011\nPD 1 of 2012-7th March, 2012\nPD 2 of 2012-9th March, 2012\nPD 3 of 2012-9th March, 2012\nPD 4 of 2012-9th February, 2012\nPD 5 of 2012-22nd May, 2012\nPD 6 of 2012-8th July, 2012\nPD 7 of 2012-19th October, 2012\nPD 1 of 2013-9th April, 2013\nPD 2 of 2013-26th September, 2013\nPD 3 of 2013-26th September, 2013\nPD 4 of 2013-12th December, 2013\nPC 1 of 2014-29th January, 2014\nPD 1 of 2014-6th January, 2014\nPD 2 of 2014-6th January, 2014\nPD 3 of 2014-6th January, 2014\nPD 4 of 2014-6th January, 2014\nPD 5 of 2014-17th January, 2014\nPD 5 of 2014 (Amended)-21st January, 2021\nPD 6 of 2014-30th April, 2014\nPD 7 of 2014-30th April, 2014\nPD 9 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\nPD 10 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nPublication Details Continued\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 3\n\nPD 11 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\nPD 12 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\nPD 13 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\nPD 14 of 2014-2nd May, 2014\nPD 15 of 2014-30th May, 2014\nPD 16 of 2014-30th May, 2014\nPD 1 of 2015-13th July, 2015\nPD 2 of 2015-20th February, 2015\nPD 3 of 2015-9th July, 2015\nPD 4 of 2015-9th July, 2015\nPD 5 of 2015-29th July, 2015\nPD 1 of 2016-8th February, 2016\nPD 1 of 2017-1st August, 2017\nPD 2 of 2017-1st August, 2017\nPD 3 of 2017-4th August, 2017\nPD 4 of 2017-4th August, 2017\nPD 1 of 2018-31st May, 2018\nPD 1 of 2019-26th February, 2019\nPD 2 of 2019-31st July, 2019\nPD 3 of 2019-25th September, 2019\nPD 4 of 2019-21st October, 2019\nPD 1 of 2020-2nd January, 2020\nPD 2 of 2020-25th March, 2020\nPD 3 of 2020-29th March, 2020\nPD 4 of 2020-29th March, 2020\nPD 5 of 2020-6th April, 2020\nPD 5A of 2020-6th April, 2020\nPD 5B of 2020-21st May, 2020\nPD 5C of 2020-6th April, 2020\nPD 5D of 2020-6th April, 2020\nPD 5E of 2020-21st May, 2020\nPD 6 of 2020-9th April, 2020\nPD 6A of 2020-5th May, 2020\nPD 7 of 2020-13th April, 2020\nPD 8 of 2020-5th May, 2020\nPD 9 of 2020-5th May, 2020\nPD 10 of 2020-29th September, 2020\nPD 11 of 2020-14th December, 2020\nPD 2 of 2021-2nd May 2021\nPD 3 of 2021-29th November, 2021\nPD 1 of 2022-7th April, 2022\nPD 2 of 2022-12th April, 2022\nPD 3 of 2022-15th August, 2022\nPD 4 of 2022-15th August, 2022\nPD 5 of 2022-15th August, 2022\nPD 6 of 2022-10th October, 2022\nPD 7 of 2022-10th October, 2022.\n\nPage 4\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nOriginally enacted \u2014\n\nLaw 56 of 2020-7th December, 2020.\n\nConsolidated this 31st day of December, 2023.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 5\n\nCAYMAN ISLANDS\n\nGrand Court Act\n(2015 Revision)\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS\n(2024 Consolidation)\nArrangement of Practice Directions\nSection\nPage\n1.\nCitation .................................................................................................................................... 13\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995\n15\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Calculation of Post-Judgment Interest\n15\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995\n17\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Method of Payment\n17\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995\n18\nTrial Bundles\n18\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996\n20\nLand Acquisition Act (as amended and revised) \u2013 Payment of Compensation into Court\n20\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996\n22\nTrial Bundles\n22\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n24\nLegal Aid Rules 1997\n24\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997\n35\nRegister of Judgments and Register of Writs, etc.\n35\n\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 6\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997\n36\nConfidentiality and Publication of Chamber's Proceedings\n36\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\n39\nFiling Documents in Court\n39\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999\n45\nDrawing Up and Filing of Judgments and Orders\n45\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999\n46\nINDICTMENTS\n46\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\n47\nLEGAL AID FORMS - AFFIDAVIT OF MEANS\n47\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000\n51\nLISTING FORMS\n51\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n53\nGUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS\n53\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004\n63\nCORRECTIONS TO JUDGMENTS\n63\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2004\n65\nPROCEEDINGS BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL\n65\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006\n73\nORDERS\n73\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008\n74\nREGISTER OF JUDGEMENTS - REGISTER OF WRITS\n74\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\n75\nSCHEMES OF ARRANGEMENT AND COMPROMISE UNDER SECTION 86 OF THE\nCOMPANIES ACT\n75\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011\n81\nGUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS\n81\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012\n83\nDELIVERY OF RESERVED JUDGMENTS\n83\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012\n85\nPROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\u2028IN WHICH THE JUDGE PRESIDES FROM\nOVERSEAS\n85\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 7\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012\n87\nATTIRE FOR PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\n87\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\n88\nLIMITED ADMISSION AS AN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW\n88\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\n92\nPRACTICE DIRECTION ON APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTIONS\n92\n72, 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d).\n92\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\n96\nLISTING OF FAMILY LAW PROCEEDINGS\n96\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012\n100\nPAYMENT SCHEDULES - AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES\n100\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\n102\nCONSENT ORDERS IN ANCILLARY RELIEF PROCEEDINGS\n102\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n106\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT\nAND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS\n106\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013\n115\nPROCEDURE FOR HEARING OF WINDING UP PETITIONS\n115\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n117\nJUDICIAL REVIEW \u2014 PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW\n117\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\n128\nPRACTICE GUIDANCE\n128\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014\n136\nREQUIREMENT FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS MADE IN THE\nFAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT\n136\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014\n139\nCOMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNSEL AND THE COURT ETC.\n139\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014\n141\nJURY TRIALS\n141\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014\n143\nORDERS FOR SALES BY PRIVATE TREATY PURSUANT TO\n143\nSECTIONS 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d).\n143\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n145\n(Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013)\n145\n\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 8\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014 (Amended)\n148\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014\n151\nProcedure for making Summary Court Applications pursuant to the Police Act (as\namended and revised) on Weekends and Public Holidays\n151\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\n153\n(Remand Proceedings by way of teleconference) - Criminal Procedure Code (as\namended and revised)\n153\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014\n157\nCOMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT \u2013 FAMILY DIVISION and IN \u201cCOURT OF\nPROTECTION MATTERS\u201d\n157\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\n160\nCOURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S REPORTS\n160\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n167\nCOURT BUNDLES IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND\nCOURT\n167\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014\n175\nARRIVAL OF CHILDREN IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS BY AIR\n175\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014\n176\nCONTRIBUTION ORDERS\n176\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\n177\nRECOMMENDED PRACTICES IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT WHEN\nINITIATING DIRECT JUDICIAL COMMUNICATION WITH A JUDGE IN A FOREIGN COURT\n177\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\n182\nINHERENT JURISDICTION (INCLUDING WARDSHIP) PROCEEDINGS\n182\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n188\nINTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION (INCLUDING 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION)\n188\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 2015 (as amended and revised) 197\nApplications for Sealing Orders and for inspection of Court Files in Civil Proceedings\nGrand Court Rules Order 63 r 3\n197\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015\n201\nApplications for inspection of Criminal Court Files Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure\nCode\n201\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 3 OF 2015\n203\nLIST OF APPROVED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS\n203\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\n204\nWITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS (GCR O. 38 AND O. 41) TAKING EVIDENCE\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 9\n\nFROM WITNESSES, AFFIANTS AND DEPONENTS WHO DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH\n204\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n209\nCAYMAN ISLANDS SUMMARY COURT - CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT\n209\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n223\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION - PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT\nAND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS\n223\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017\n231\nPayments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts Act and Grand Court\nRules Order 92 (GCR O. 92).\n231\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\n233\nRegistration of Foreign Maintenance Orders or Judgments Sections 14, 22 and 23 of the\nMaintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\"the Law\")\n233\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\n237\nCourt Stenographer Services\n237\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017\n243\nFiling of Winding Up Petitions\n243\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\n245\nCourt-to-court communications and cooperation in cross-border insolvency and\nrestructuring cases\n245\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019\n249\nDIRECTIONS FOR PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER SECTION 238 OF THE\nCOMPANIES ACT\n249\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\n251\nAdoption of Judicial Insolvency Network Modalities\n251\nFor Court-To-Court Communications\n251\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\n257\nPROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT: COSTS ESTIMATES\n257\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019\n261\nCriminal Procedure - Remand Warrants where defendant found unfit to plead - Committal\nWarrants where defendant found to be not guilty by reason of insanity\n261\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\n263\nMEDIATION INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT RULES 2020\n263\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\n269\nCOVID 19: GUIDANCE FOR THE FAMILY DIVISION - 25 MARCH 2020\n269\n\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 10\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020\n277\nFAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS\n277\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020\n280\nFAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS - FAMILY MENTION DAYS\n280\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\n283\nTHE USE OF E-MAILS FOR FILING AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, COURT SEALS\nAND STAMPS\n283\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\n288\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) - FAMILY\nREGISTRY\n288\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\n294\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) -\nCRIMINAL REGISTRY\n294\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\n299\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) -\nCRIMINAL REGISTRY\n299\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\n305\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) -\nCRIMINAL REGISTRY\n305\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\n309\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JEMS) -\nCRIMINAL REGISTRY\n309\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n316\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD\nREMOTE HEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND UNTIL\nFURTHER NOTICE\n316\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020\n334\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION MODIFYING STANDARD\nHEARING PRACTICE DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE\n334\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020\n336\nSittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of video-conference\n336\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020\n339\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS BY AUDIO OR VIDEO LINKS DURING THE\nCOVID-19 PANDEMIC\n339\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020\n341\nGUIDANCE FOR THE REMOTE NOTARISATION AND ATTESTATION OF DOCUMENTS BY\nELECTRONIC MEANS\n341\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nArrangement of Practice\nDirections\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 11\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020\n344\n1.\nDRAWING UP AND FILING OF JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS\n344\n2.\nFORM OF ORDERS MADE BY THE COURT APPROVED AS TO FORM AND\nCONTENT OR WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES\n344\n3.\nPROVISION OF ORDERS OF THE COURT BY THE CLERK OF COURT\n344\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\n347\nELECTRONIC FILING (E-FILING) AND E-SERVICE IN THE GRAND COURT OF\nDOCUMENTS VIA THE JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION E-FILING PLATFORM\n347\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021\n353\nCOURT FEES RULES (as amended and revised) (\u201cthe Rules\u201d) - GRAND COURT RULES\nORDER 62 RULE 3(1)\n353\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021\n356\nEXHIBITS IN CRIMINAL CASES\n356\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\n358\nLISTING AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS\n358\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\n367\nPROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL\nSERVICES PROCEEDINGS\n367\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\n374\nJUDICIAL MEDIATION GUIDELINES\n374\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022\n378\nLISTING OF CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIVIL DIVISION, SHORT SUMMONSES AND\nASSIGNED JUDGES\n378\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022\n380\nPROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF\nPROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT (as amended\nand revised)\n380\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n382\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO CRIMINAL COURTS\n382\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\n402\nMcKENZIE FRIENDS (CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS)\n402\nENDNOTES\n407\nTable of Practice Directions (includes superseded\/revoked): ........................................................... 407\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\nSection 1\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 13\n\nCAYMAN ISLANDS\n\nGrand Court Act\n(2015 Revision)\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS\n (2024 Consolidation)\n\n1.\nCitation\n1.\nThese Practice Directions may be cited as the Grand Court Practice Directions (2024\nConsolidation).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 15\n\n GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Calculation of Post-Judgment\nInterest\n (GCR O.50A, r.7)\n\n1. Wherever a judgment debt is ordered to be paid by instalments pursuant\nto an attachment of earnings order made under GCR Order 50A, rule 7,\npost-judgment interest will be calculated at the time of making the order.\n\n2. The amount of interest will be calculated on the assumption that the\ninstalments are paid on due date, using the following formula where D is\nthe amount of the judgment debt (including principal and pre-judgment\ninterest); N is the number of monthly instalments; R is the prescribed rate;\nI is the interest payable; and X is the amount of each instalment, i.e. the\nnormal monthly deduction rate.\n\n(\ud835\udc37\ud835\udc65\ud835\udc41\n24 ) \ud835\udc45= 1\n\nAmount of each instalment will be\n\n(\ud835\udc37\n\ud835\udc41) + ( \ud835\udc3c\n\ud835\udc41) = \ud835\udc4b\n\nExample:\nJudgment debt CI$12,500 which is to be payable by equal instalments over\n36 months. The prescribed rate of post-judgment interest payable on CI\ndollar debts is currently 8% per annum. The monthly instalment is therefore\nCI$388.89 calculated as follows:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1995\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 16\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nInterest payable\n(12,500\ud835\udc6536\n24\n) 8% = 1,500\n\nThe amount of each instalment\n\n(12,500\n36\n) + (1,500\n36 ) = 388.89\/\ud835\udc5a\ud835\udc5c\ud835\udc5b\ud835\udc61\u210e\n\nEach instalment therefore comprises principal of CI$347.22 and interest of\nCI$41.67.\n\nDATED this 1st day of May, 1995.\n_______________________________\nHon. George Harre, Chief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 17\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1995\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013 Method of Payment\n (GCR O.50A, r.8)\n\n1. Payment of sums due under attachment of earnings orders must be made\nby cheque made payable to \"The Accountant General of the Grand Court\".\n\n2. Cheques must be sent by post or hand delivered to the Court Funds\nOffice, Government Administration Building, George Town.\n\n3. Upon being served with an attachment of earnings order, employers will\nalso be provided with a book of pre-printed carbonised lodgment\/receipt\nforms.\n\n4. The employer must complete a carbonised lodgment\/receipt form and\nsend both the white original and the blue copy to the Court Funds Office\nwith each payment.\n\n5. The blue copy receipt form will then be signed by an authorised officer\nof the Court Funds Office and returned to the employer as that employer\u2019s\nreceipt.\n\n6. Deductions made from an employee's remuneration must be recorded in\nthe employer's work account maintained in accordance with Section 30(1)\nof the Labour Act (as amended and revised), and the receipts issued by the\nCourt Funds Office should be treated as part of the work account to be\npreserved for at least two years.\n\nMADE this 1st day of May, 1995 with the prior approval of the Chief Justice\nof the Grand Court\n\n_______________________________\nAlan Mason, Accountant General\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 18\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nTrial Bundles\n (GCR O.34, r.10)\n1. Order 34, rule 10 is intended to ensure that:\n(a) The trial judge is able to read the core documents prior to the\ncommencement of the trial; and\n(b) The Court has available all necessary documents, properly\norganised into bundles, at the commencement of every trial.\nThe rule requires the plaintiff to deliver bundles of documents to the\nClerk of the Court for these purposes.\n2. Order 34, rule 10 does not specify how, when or by whom the bundles of\ndocuments shall be prepared. This is a matter left to the parties to determine\nby agreement having regard to the circumstances of each individual case.\n3. In cases involving a small number of documents (such as personal injury\nclaims) it will normally be appropriate for all the documents to be included\nin the core bundles; for those bundles to be created by the plaintiff; and for\nthem to be delivered to the defendant at the same time as they are delivered\nto the Clerk of the Court in accordance with rule 10(1).\n4. In cases involving large numbers of documents, it would normally be\nappropriate for the parties' attorneys to make arrangements for those\ndocuments to be indexed, paginated and put into bundles long before the\nplaintiff is required to deliver them to the Clerk of the Court.\n5. It is the duty of the parties and their attorneys to make all such\narrangements for the preparation and exchange of bundles of documents as\nmay be appropriate, having regard to the circumstances of the case. The\nobjective is to ensure that both parties have available to them bundles of all\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1995\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 19\n\nthe documents (indexed, paginated and organised in the way in which they\nwill be used at the trial) at such time as may be necessary to enable them to\nproperly prepare their respective cases in time for the commencement of the\ntrial.\n\nDATED this 7th day of March, 1996\n\nHON. GEORGE HARRE\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 20\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nLand Acquisition Act (as amended and revised) \u2013 Payment of\nCompensation into Court\n\n1.  Where a lodgment of funds in Court is made by the Cabinet pursuant\nto Section 27(2) of the Land Acquisition Act (as amended and revised),\nsuch payment shall be accompanied by a request for lodgment in\npractice form no. 1.\n\n2.  The request for lodgment shall specify particulars of the title of the land\nto which the compensation relates and the names and addresses of all\nthe persons who are believed to be entitled or claim to be entitled to all\nor part of such compensation.\n\n3.  The officer who signs the request for lodgment on behalf of the Cabinet\nshould send notice of lodgment to all the persons who are believed to\nbe entitled or claim to be entitled to all or part of such compensation.\n\nMADE this 5th day of January, 1996 with the prior approval of the Chief\nJustice of the Grand Court.\n\n_______________________________\nAlan Mason, Accountant General\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1996\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 21\n\nREQUEST FOR LODGMENT\nPursuant to Section 27 of the Land Acquisition Act (as amended and\nrevised)\nGCR Form 1\n\nDescription of Land\n\nI, __________________________________, request that the Accountant\nGeneral of the Grand Court do receive into Court for lodgment to a\nNominated Account the sum of CI$_______, being the compensation\nawarded by the Cabinet in respect of the compulsory acquisition of the\nabove-mentioned land.\n\nDATED this ____ day of _____________________, 20____\n\nSigned ___________________________________________\n[\n\n]\n\nThe following persons are believed to be entitled or claim to be entitled to all\nor part of this compensation:\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nCOURT FUNDS OFFICE USE\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 22\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nDate received\nNominated Account number\nDate funds transferred to a Nominated Account\nLodgment approved by:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nTrial Bundles\n (GCR O.34, r.10)\n1. Order 34, rule 10 is intended to ensure that:\n(a) The trial judge is able to read the core documents prior to the\ncommencement of the trial; and\n(b) The Court has available all necessary documents, properly\norganised into bundles, at the commencement of every trial.\nThe rule requires the plaintiff to deliver bundles of documents to the\nClerk of the Court for these purposes.\n2. Order 34, rule 10 does not specify how, when or by whom the bundles of\ndocuments shall be prepared. This is a matter left to the parties to determine\nby agreement having regard to the circumstances of each individual case.\n3. In cases involving a small number of documents (such as personal injury\nclaims) it will normally be appropriate for all the documents to be included\nin the core bundles; for those bundles to be created by the plaintiff; and for\nthem to be delivered to the defendant at the same time as they are delivered\nto the Clerk of the Court in accordance with rule 10(1).\n4. In cases involving large numbers of documents, it would normally be\nappropriate for the parties' attorneys to make arrangements for those\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1996\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 23\n\ndocuments to be indexed, paginated and put into bundles long before the\nplaintiff is required to deliver them to the Clerk of the Court.\n5. It is the duty of the parties and their attorneys to make all such\narrangements for the preparation and exchange of bundles of documents as\nmay be appropriate, having regard to the circumstances of the case. The\nobjective is to ensure that both parties have available to them bundles of all\nthe documents (indexed, paginated and organised in the way in which they\nwill be used at the trail) at such time as may be necessary to enable them to\nproperly prepare their respective cases in time for the commencement of the\ntrail.\n\nDATED this 7th day of March, 1996\n\nHON. GEORGE HARRE\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 24\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nLegal Aid Rules 1997\n\nIn accordance with Rule 5 of the Legal Aid Rules 1997, I have established\nthe following Forms to be used for the purpose of the rules \u2013\n\n1. Application for Criminal Legal Aid.\n\n2. Statement of Means.\n\n3. Application for Civil Legal Aid.\n\n4. Criminal Legal Aid Certificate.\n\n5. Civil Legal Aid Certificate.\n\n6. Bill of costs.\n\nCopies of the Forms may be obtained from the Courts Office.\n\nMADE this 1st day of April, 1997.\n\nG.E. Harre\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 25\n\nForm No. 1\nLEGAL AID RULES 1997\nApplication for Criminal Legal Aid\n1.\nName\n2.\nAddress\n3.\nHave you already instructed an attorney?  If so,\n(a)\nAttorney's name\n(b)\nAttorney's address\n(c)\nDate upon which you instructed the attorney\n(d)\nHave you agreed to pay the attorney any fee?\n4.\nThe following documents are attached\n(a)\nCopy charges\/indictment\n(b)\nStatement means form\n5.\nDo you intend to plead guilty or not guilty to all or any of the charges?\nI hereby apply for the grant of criminal legal aid in respect of the charges mentioned above\non the grounds that I do not have the financial means to pay the cost of obtaining legal\nadvice and representation.\nI hereby certify that the information contained in the attached statement of means is true,\naccurate and complete.\n_______________________          ______________________________\n\nApplicant's signature\n\nDate\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 26\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm No. 2\nLEGAL AID RULES 1997\nStatement of Means\n1.\nPersonal details\n.               Age:\n\nName:\n\nAddress:\n\nMarital status:\nMarried\nSingle\nDivorced\n\n2.\nDetails of children:\n\nName\nAge\n\n3.\nDetails of other dependents:\n\nName\nRelationship\n\n4.\nDetails of employment:\nEmployer's name:\n\nEmployer's Address:\n\nYour Job\nSpecification:\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 27\n\nAmount of Wages:\n\n5.\nIf unemployed:\nReason for\nunemployment:\nAmount of pension (if any):\n6.\nDetails of land owned:\nRegistration details:\nEstimated value:\n7.\nDetails of savings:\nName of bank:\n\nAccount Nos:\n\n8.\nDetails of monthly expenses:\nMortgage instalments:\nRent:\nUtilities:\nMaintenance Orders: Loan instalments:\n9.\nOther relevant information:\nA separate sheet may be used if necessary.\nI declare that the details contained in this statement of means are true and accurate to the\nbest of my knowledge and belief.\n___________________________\n______________________\nApplicant's signature\n\nDate\n\nWork Permit No.\n\nRegistration Section\nBlock\nParcel\n\nAmount of Mortgage\n\nBalance:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 28\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm No. 3\n\nLEGAL AID RULES 1997\n\nApplication for Civil Legal Aid\n\n1.\nName\n2.\nAddress\n3.\nHave you already instructed an attorney?  If so, state -\n(a)\nAttorney's name\n(b)\nAttorney's address\n(c)\nDate upon which you instructed the attorney\n(d)\nHave you agreed to pay the attorney\nany fee?\n4.\nState full particulars of the proceedings which you intend to bring or which have been\nbrought against you.\n\n(a)\nCause No.\n(b)\nOpposing Parties\n(c)\nNature of Proceedings\n\n5.\nThe following documents are attached\n(a)\nDocuments served on me by the Plaintiff\/Applicant (if any)\n(b)\nA statement setting out the basis of my claim\/defence\n(c)\nAn attorney's opinion (if any)\n(d)\nStatement means\nI hereby apply for civil legal aid to enable me to pursue the claim\/defend the proceedings (delete\nas applicable) described above on the grounds that my case has merit and I do not have the\nfinancial means to obtain legal advice and representation.  I hereby certify that the information\ncontained in the attached statement of means is true, accurate and complete.\n\n____________________________________\n________________________________\nApplicant's signature\n\nDate\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 29\n\nForm No. 4\nCriminal Legal Aid Certificate\n1.\nName\n2.\nAddress\n3.\nOffences (Specify below the Scheduled Offences to which the certificate relates\nby reference to the charge numbers and\/or the indictment number and the\nrelevant counts in the indictment)\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n___________________________________________________\n\n 4. Attorneys\nI hereby certify that the above mentioned person is entitled to obtain legal advice and\nrepresentation in respect of the scheduled offences specified above with effect from\n(specify the effective date which may not be earlier than the date upon which the applicant\nfirst instructed the attorney).\n___________________________________\n____________________________\nJudge\/Magistrate\n\n              Date\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 30\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nCRIMINAL LEGAL AID CERTIFICATE\nNOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ASSISTED PERSONS\n1.\nAttorney\nThe Certificate specifies the attorney whom the assisted person is authorised to\ninstruct.  The assisted person may not instruct any other attorney without the\nCourt's consent.\n2.\nProceedings\nThe Certificate specifies the charges in respect of which the assisted person is\nauthorised to obtain legal advice and representation.  The assisted person may\nnot seek advice about other charges without first obtaining the Court's consent.\n3.\nContributions\nIf convicted of any of the charges specified in the certificate, the assisted person\nmay be ordered to pay a contribution towards the cost of that assisted person\u2019s\nlegal representation.\n4.\nBail Applications\nThis certificate enables the assisted person to be represented on one bail\napplication only unless with prior leave of the Court.\n5.\n\"Mentions\"\nThis certificate does not authorise the assisted person to instruct an attorney to\nappear when that assisted person\u2019s case is merely \"mentioned\" in Court.\n\n6.\nEffective Date\n\nThis is the date from which the certificate is effective and may be backdated to\nthe date upon which the assisted person first instructed that assisted person\u2019s\nattorney.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 31\n\nForm No. 5\nCivil Legal Aid Certificate\n1.\nName\n2.\nAddress\n3.\nAttorney\n(See Note 1)\n4.\nProceedings\n\n5.\nConditions\n(See Note 3)\n6.\nEffective Date\n(See Note 4)\nI hereby certify that the above mentioned person is authorised to seek and obtain legal\nadvice and representation in respect of the proceedings or intended proceedings described\nabove, subject to the limitations and conditions specified above.\n__________________________\n____________________________\nJudge of the Grand Court\n\nDate\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 32\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nCIVIL LEGAL AID CERTIFICATE\nNOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ASSISTED PERSONS\n1.\nAttorney\nThe Certificate specifies the attorney whom the assisted person is authorised to\ninstruct.  The assisted person may not instruct any other attorney without the\nCourt's consent.\n2.\nProceedings\nThe Certificate specifies the proceedings or intended proceedings in respect of\nwhich the assisted person is authorised to obtain legal advice and representation.\nThe assisted person may not seek advice about the commencement or the defence\nof any other causes of action or proceedings, without first obtaining the Court's\nconsent.\n\n3.\nConditions\n\nThe Certificate specifies the limitations upon the assisted person's authority to\nseek legal advice and representation and the conditions, as to contributions and\nother matters, with which that assisted person must comply.  Contributions may\nbe expressed as a fixed sum or a percentage of the total cost or a combination of\nboth and may be payable by means of a lump sum or by instalments.\n\n4.\nEffective Date\n\nThis is the date from which the certificate is effective and may be backdated to\nthe date upon which the assisted person first instructed that assisted person\u2019s\nattorney.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 33\n\nForm No. 6\nBill of Costs\nIN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS\n\nCAUSE NO: ____ OF 20\n[TITLE OF PROCEEDING]\nBill of Costs\nto be Taxed Pursuant to The Legal Aid Rules 1997\n\nDate\n\nItem\nAmount Claimed\nAmount Allowed\n\nInstructions on behalf of [state name]\npursuant to a legal aid certificate dated\n[state date]\n\n[Set out a general description of the\nproceedings, the cause of action and the\noutcome.]\n\n[Then set out each item of work, the date on\nwhich it was done and the time engaged.]\n\nTOTAL CLAIMED:\n\nSignature of Attorney:\n\nTOTAL ALLOWED\n\nSignature of Taxing Officer:\n\nDATED this ______ day of _________________, 19____\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 34\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nLEGAL AID TAXATION\nNOTES FOR THE GUIDANCE OF ATTORNEYS\n1.\nEvery bill of costs must be in Form No. 6.  It must specify the legal aid certificate to\nwhich it relates; it must be stated in CI dollars; and it must be signed by the attorney\nnamed in the certificate or a partner of the firm named in the certificate.  Any\ndisbursement incurred in a foreign currency must be translated into CI dollars.\n2.\nThe introduction to the bill of costs should describe the nature of the proceedings and\ninclude a short summary of the plaintiff's cause of action, the defendant's case and the\nfinal outcome.  The purpose of the introduction is to provide the taxing officer with a\nproper understanding of the proceeding without having to read the court file.\n3.\nThe main part of the bill of costs should comprise a detailed description of each item\nof work done; the date upon which it was done and the amount of attorney time\nexpended in doing the work.  Time spent by paralegals, secretaries and messengers is\nnot chargeable.  Such time is considered to be part of the attorney's overheads and is\nreflected in the hourly rate for work done by attorneys.\n4.\nThe applicable time unit is either 15 minutes for those attorneys using a manual time\nrecording and accounting systems or 6 minutes for those attorneys using computerised\ntime recording and accounting systems.\n5.\nWhenever the item of work comprises the preparation or review of any pleading,\naffidavit or other document on the court file, it must be clearly described so that the\ntaxing officer can easily identify it.\n6.\nTime waiting at court in excess of an hour will normally be disallowed.\n7.\nIt is the duty of attorneys to maintain client files, timesheets and accounting records\nin a way which will enable them to produce a bill of costs expeditiously and\neconomically.  Time spent by attorneys in preparing a bill of costs will normally be\nallowed at half the hourly rate specified in rule 17.\n8.\nAttorneys must be prepared to verify the content of bills of costs by reference to client\nfiles, timesheets and accounting records.  All claims for disbursements, except\ntelephone calls and photocopying charges, must be supported by receipts.  Attorneys\nmust be prepared to produce telephone bills if required to do so by the taxing officer.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 35\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1997\nRegister of Judgments and Register of Writs, etc.\n(GCR O.63, rr.7 and 8)\n\n1.  GCR Order 63, rr.7 and 8 provide for the establishment of a register of\njudgments containing an office copy of every final judgment made or\ntreated as having been made in open court and a register of writs and\nother originating process containing office copies of every writ,\noriginating summons, originating motion or petition issued by the\ncourt. These registers are open to public inspection upon payment of\nthe prescribed fees.\n\n2.  The registers were created on 1st June, 1995 and contain office copies\nof judgments given and originating process issued only after that date.\n\n3.  Any person wishing to obtain a copy of any judgment given in open\ncourt or any originating process issued prior to 1st June, 1995 should\nmake application by letter addressed to the Clerk of the Court. Such\napplication should specify the full title and cause number of the action\nin question. The Clerk of the Court will then arrange for copies to be\nobtained from the relevant court files as soon thereafter as is reasonably\npossible.\n\nMADE this 9th day of April, 1997.\n\n_______________________________\nHon. George Harre, Chief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 36\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997\nConfidentiality and Publication of Chamber's Proceedings\n\nIn the absence of local rules, the Cayman Islands practice for the reporting\nof proceedings heard in chambers is to be found in the English\nAdministration of Justice Act 1960, s.12, with the addition of the provisions\nof this direction. Section 12 reads:\n\n\"(1) The publication of information relating to proceedings before any court\nsitting in private shall not itself be contempt of court except in the following\ncases, that is to say \u2013\n\n(a)  where the proceedings relate to the wardship or adoption of an\ninfant or wholly or mainly to the guardianship, custody,\nmaintenance or upbringing of an infant, or rights of access to an\ninfant;\n\n(b)  where the proceedings are brought under Part VIII of the Mental\nHealth Act, 1959, or under any provision of that Act authorising\nan application or reference to be made to a Mental Health Review\nTribunal or to a county court;\n\n(c)  where the court sits in private for reasons of national security\n\n during that part of the proceedings about which the information in\n question is published;\n\n(d)  where the information relates to a secret process, discovery or\ninvention which is in issue in the proceedings;\n\n(e)  where the court (having power to do so) expressly prohibits the\npublication of all information relating to the proceedings or of\ninformation of the description which is published.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 37\n\n(2) Without prejudice to the foregoing subsection, the publication of the text\nor a summary of the whole or part of an order made by a court sitting in\nprivate shall not of itself be contempt of court except where the court\n(having power to do so) expressly prohibits the publication.\n\n(3) In this section references to a court include references to a judge and to\na tribunal and to any person exercising the functions of a court, a judge or a\ntribunal; and references to a court sitting in private include references to a\ncourt sitting in camera or in chambers.\n\n(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as implying that any\npublication is punishable as contempt of court which would not be so\npunishable apart from this section.\"\n\nIn view of the sensitivity of many proceedings now routinely being brought\nin the commercial or civil jurisdiction of the Grand Court, the parties\ninvolved in any matters taken in chambers about which information might\nbe published but for an express prohibition, are to be at liberty to apply for\nan order against or delimiting publication.\n\nOnce the publication is made, it will then be in the discretion of the judge\nin the particular case to determine the ambit of publication. The publication\nof information relating to proceedings taken in chambers will not then of\nitself be a contempt of court unless it is contrary to the guidelines set out\nherein or contrary to a direction made by the judge in the case.\n\nThe form below should be submitted by counsel prior to and certainly no\nlater than the occasion of the delivery of the written ruling or judgment in\nany case in which the issue arises. It is preferable that the application be\nsubmitted in advance, particularly when a matter is pending decision, so\nthat it may be reflected in the order, ruling or judgment.\n\nThe use of the form will avoid the need for any separate application by way\nof summons in the cause. Notice of the submission of the form is to be given\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 1997\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 38\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nto all sides. Unless it is necessary that counsel be heard in person (e.g. if\nany other party objects) the application may be submitted with written\nreasons, to be considered by the judge administratively and the decision\nnotified in writing.\n\n11th August 1997\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 39\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nFiling Documents in Court\n\n1 Application and Commencement\n1.1  This practice direction applies to all proceedings to which the\nGrand Court Rules have general application by virtue of O.1, r.2\nand to all winding up proceedings.\n1.2  It does not apply to-\n1.2.1 proceedings governed by the Matrimonial Causes Rules (as\namended and revised);\n1.2.2 proceedings governed by the Grand Court (Bankruptcy)\nRules (as amended and revised); and\n1.2.3 appeals from civil proceedings in the Summary Court.\n1.3 This practice direction shall come into force on 1st March, 1999\n(\u201cthe Commencement Date\u201d).\n\n2 Introduction\n2.1 The Grand Court (Civil Procedure) Rules (as amended and\nrevised) specifically required that all pleadings be filed. Although\nthere was no similar requirement for affidavits and other\ndocuments to be filed, it became the established practice for all\npleadings, affidavits, notices, lists and other documents to be filed\nwhether or not they were actually used by the Court.\n2.2 The rules relating to filing were materially changed with effect from\n1st June, 1995, but the pre-existing practice has continued with the\nresult that the Court office is accumulating a large volume of\ndocuments unnecessarily. The Grand Court Rules (as amended\nand revised) required that the following documents shall be issued\nby or filed with the Court \u2014\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 40\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.2.1writs, originating summonses, originating motions and\npetitions (O.5, r.1);\n2.2.2 third party notices (O.5, r.1 and O.16, r.3);\n2.2.3 acknowledgements of service (O.12, r.4);\n2.2.4 interlocutory summonses and notices of motion (O.32, r.2);\n2.2.5 affidavits (including the exhibits) which are actually used in\ncourt (O.41, r.9);\n2.2.6 judgements and orders (O.42, r.5);\n2.2.7 applications for default judgements (O.42, r.6);\n2.2.8 writs of execution (O.46, r.6);\n2.2.9 notices of change, appointment, etc. of attorney (O.67, r.8).\n2.3 No other documents are required to be filed, although it is the\nestablished practice to file all pleadings. GCR O.18 has been\namended to require pleadings to be filed within 14 days after\nservice.\n2.4 The procedure for issuing writs (including writs of execution) and\nother forms of originating and interlocutory process involves filing\nan original document signed by or on behalf of the plaintiff or\napplicant. The procedure for drawing up and perfecting\njudgements and orders also involves filing an original document\nsigned by the judge or stamped with a facsimile of the judge\u2019s\nsignature. Acknowledgements of service and notices of change,\netc. are required to be filed because they constitute notice both to\nthe Court and to the parties. Affidavits only require to be filed if\nand when they are used in a cause or matter.\n2.5 With effect from the Commencement Date, the practice relating to\nfiling will be brought into line with the Rules as follows.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 41\n\n3 New Practice\n3.1 Pleadings. The new GCR O.18 now requires that all pleadings be\nfiled within 14 days after service. Pleadings are defined to mean\nstatements of claim, defences, replies, counterclaims, defences to\ncounterclaims, pleadings subsequent to reply (which may only be\nserved with leave) and particulars of pleadings (but not the\nrequests for particulars). It should be noted that the term\n\u201cpleadings\u201d does not include generally endorsed writs,\nsummonses, motions or petitions, all of which do require to be filed\nas part of the procedure whereby they are issued. A writ which is\nspecially endorsed with a statement of claim does constitute a\npleading and requires to be filed as part of the procedure for issuing\nthe writ.\n3.2 Discovery. GCR O.24 requires that lists of documents, notices to\nproduce documents, affidavits verifying lists, etc. shall be served.\nIt does not require that any such documents shall be filed.\n3.3 Interrogatories. Interrogatories and affidavits containing answers\nto interrogatories served in accordance with GCR O.26 shall not\nbe filed.\n3.4 Evidence for trial. The parties to actions commenced by writ are\nrequired or permitted by various rules to prepare and exchange\nwritten evidence in advance of the trial. GCR O.38 provides for\nthe exchange of witness statements, expert reports and affidavits.\nGCR O.38 Part II comprises a code relating to the admission of\nhearsay evidence which involves the service of notices and\ncounter-notices. GCR O.39 makes provision for evidence to be\ntaken by deposition. No witness statements, affidavits, reports,\ndepositions or notices served pursuant to these rules are required\nto be filed.\n3.5 Affidavits.\n3.5.1 Whether or not affidavits are required to be filed depends upon\nthe purpose for which they are served. GCR O.41, r.9 provides that\nevery affidavit used in a cause or matter must be filed. An affidavit\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 42\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nis only used within the meaning of this rule when it is read by the\njudge and constitutes part of the evidential basis upon which a\njudgement is given or an order is made. Affidavits which are sworn\nin compliance with orders (e.g., affidavits verifying lists of\ndocuments and affidavits made in compliance with asset disclosure\norders) are required to be served but should not be filed because\nthey are not intended to be used by the Court.\n3.5.2 Whilst copies of affidavits sworn in connection with interlocutory\napplications are required to be served, the original affidavits are\nonly required to be filed in accordance with GCR O.41, r.9 if the\napplication is in fact contested with the result that such affidavits\nare read by the judge and constitute part of the evidential basis\nupon which the order is made. It follows that original affidavits\nneed not be filed in advance of the hearing.\n3.5.3 Written statements of evidence, whether in the form of affidavits,\nwitness statements or depositions, intended to be used in evidence\nat trial are only required to be filed in the event that a trial takes\nplace and such documents are in fact admitted in evidence. Since\nthe vast majority of actions are settled, such documents should not\nbe filed in anticipation of a trial taking place.\n3.5.4 GCR O.41, r.9(2) requires that the exhibits to affidavits should\nnot be filed. Copy exhibits need to be served and made available\nto the Judge in advance of the hearing but the original exhibits\nshould be kept by the party\u2019s attorney and are not required to be\nfiled.\n3.6  Originating\nSummons\nProcedure.\nAffidavits\nsworn\nin\ncompliance with GCR O.28 are required to be filed.\n3.7  Petition and Originating Notice of Motion Procedure.\nAffidavits sworn in connection with petitions and originating (but\nnot interlocutory) notices of motion require to be filed.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 43\n\n3.8 Payment into Court. Notices relating to payment into court and\nacceptance of funds in court served pursuant to GCR O.22, rr.3 and 4\nshall not be filed. Lodgement and payment schedules require to be\ndelivered to the Court Funds Office but are not required to be filed on\nthe Court file.\n3.9 Voluntary Filing is not Permitted. With effect from the\nCommencement Date, the Clerk of the Court will not accept for filing\nany document which is not required to be filed under the Rules.\n4 Preparing Interlocutory Applications and Trials\n4.1 When preparing an interlocutory application, it shall be the duty of\nthe applicant\u2019s attorney, after consultation with the attorneys for\nthe other parties, to prepare and deliver to the relevant judge\u2019s\nsecretary a bundle containing copies of all those pleadings,\naffidavits, etc. which are relevant to the application. Unless the\napplication is both short and straightforward, such bundles should\nnormally be delivered in advance of the hearing, preferably by the\nThursday of the previous week. In the event that the hearing is\nvacated for whatever reason, the judge\u2019s bundle will be returned to\nthe applicant\u2019s attorney and there will be no requirement for any\npart of it to be filed. In the event that the hearing takes place, the\njudge\u2019s bundle will be returned to the applicant\u2019s attorney after the\njudge has made that judge\u2019s order, but it shall be the duty of the\nparties\u2019 attorneys to file the originals of those affidavits read by the\njudge.\n5 Correspondence Between Attorneys\n5.1 Correspondence between the parties\u2019 attorneys should never be\ncopied to the Court and will not be placed on court files.\n5.2 Any such correspondence received by the Clerk of the Court will\nbe destroyed.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 44\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n6 Authorities\n6.1 Lists of authorities and\/or bundles of copy authorities should be\nagreed between the parties\u2019 attorneys and sent to the Judge\u2019s\nsecretary in advance of the hearing.\n6.2 Neither lists of authorities, nor bundles of copy authorities, should\nbe filed.\n\nDATED this 28th day of January, 1999.\n\n__________________________________\nHonourable Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 45\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 1999\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nDrawing Up and Filing of Judgments and Orders\n(GCR O.42, r.5(4) and (5))\n\n1.  Every judgment or order should be dated with the date upon which it\nwas made. A judgment or order is made when the judge pronounces it.\n\n2.  The attorney responsible for drawing up a judgment or order should\ninclude the date upon which it was made in the draft which is presented\nfor signature. Unsigned draft orders must be not be sealed.\n\n3.  The date upon which a judgment or order is filed is the date upon which\nit is signed. After having been signed the judgment or order will be\nsealed with the Court seal and the date of filing will be inserted either\nby the judge themselves or a court official.\n\nMADE this 28th day of January, 1999.\n\n______________________________________\nHon. Anthony Smellie, QC, Chief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 46\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 1999\nINDICTMENTS\n1. Application and Commencement\n1.1 This practice direction applies to all committals for trial to the Grand\nCourt in accordance with Part V of the Criminal Procedure Code (as\namended and revised) (the \"Code\").\n1.2 This practice direction shall come into force on 1st June 1999 (the\n\"commencement date\")\n2. Introduction\n2.1 Section 106 of the Code requires that a signed indictment be filed in the\noffice of the Grand Court.\n2.2 The Code specifies that a copy of the indictment shall be served on the\naccused at least three days before the day of the trial. There are no\ndirections in the Code to specify when the indictment shall be filed.\n3. New Practice\n3.1 This Practice Direction requires that all indictments with the exception\nof those specified in paragraph 3.2 shall be filed in the office of the\nClerk of the Court within seven days of the date of committal for trial.\n3.2 Where the prosecution are unable to file an indictment within the seven\ndays specified in paragraph 3.1 it shall be the duty of the prosecution\nto bring this to the attention of the Listing Officer of the Grand Court\nwithin seven days of the date of committal for trial. The Listing Officer\nwill then fix a mention date for a judge to give directions.\n4. Plea & Direction Forms\n4.1 As a consequence of the above, plea and direction forms are to be filed\nby the defence within seven days of the filing of the indictment.\n\nDated this 26th day of June 1999\nAnthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 47\n\nIN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\nLEGAL AID FORMS - AFFIDAVIT OF MEANS\n\nIn accordance with Rule 5 of the Legal Aid Rules 1997 an Affidavit of\nMeans in the Form attached will be required of applicants for Legal Aid.\nEffective immediately, this Form of Affidavit of Means will be required in\nsubstitution for the Statement of Means prescribed by Practice Direction\n1\/97 issued on 1 April 1997.\n\nCopies of the Form of Affidavit of Means may be obtained from the Courts\nOffice.\n\nAnthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\n27th October 1999\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 48\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm No. 2\nLEGAL AID RULES 1997\nAffidavit of Means\n\nI________________________ of ___________________________\nMake oath and say as follows:\n\nThe following details are a true statement of my financial means and I understand that it is an offence\nunder the Poor Persons (Legal Aid) Act (as amended and revised) punishable by imprisonment or a\nfine to make a false statement.\n\n1. Personal Details:\nName:______________________________\nAge:________________\n\nAddress:____________________________________________________\n\nMarital status: Married \/ Single \/ Divorce \/ Separated\n\n2. Details of Children:\nName\nAge\n\n3. Details of dependents:\nName\nRelationship\n\n4. Details of employment:\n\nEmployer\u2019s name:      __________________________________\n\nEmployer\u2019s address: ___________________________________\n\nNature of employment: ________________________________\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 49\n\n4. (continued)\n\nAmount of wages CI$ _____________________ Per week\/month\/year\n\nOvertime\/bonus\/gratuities CI$ ______________ Per week\/month\/year\n\nWork Permit Number _____________________\n\n5. Details of other employment:\n\nEmployer's name: _________________________________\n\nEmployer's address: _________________________________\n\nNature of employment: _______________________________\n\nAmount of wages CI$ ____________________________ Per week\/month\/year\n\nOvertime\/bonus\/gratuities CI$ _____________________ Per week\/month\/year\n\nWork Permit Number _____________________\n\n6. I enclose proof of my earnings and saving accounts.\n\n7. I am unemployed for the following reasons\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n\nMy prospect of obtaining employment is as follows:\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n\n8. Details of other income (examples are affiliation\/maintenance\/property rental\/self\nemployment\/pension)\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n______________________________________________________________________________\n\n9. Details of savings\/checking accounts:\nName of bank or other account\nAccount number\nBalance\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 1999\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 50\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n10. Details of land owned:\n\nRegistration\nSection\nBlock\nParcel\nEstimated\nBalance\nMortgage\nBalance\n\n11. I have no other form of income or property.\n\n12. Details of monthly expenses:\nMortgage\/rent\nCI$\nUtilities\nCI$\nMaintenance Payments\nCI$\nLoan Payments\nCI$\n\nCI$\n\nCI$\n\nCI$\n\n13. Any other relevant information (A separate sheet may be used if necessary):\n\nSworn to at George Town, Grand Cayman)\nthis       day of                                             )\n20     before me                                           )\n                                                                    ) _________________________________\n\n__________________________________\nJustice of the Peace\n\nGCR 1995 (revised)\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 51\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nLISTING FORMS\n\n1 Application and Commencement\n1.1 This practice direction applies to-\na.  all interlocutory applications made in any action begun by a writ\nor originating summons;\nb.  all applications governed by the Matrimonial Causes Rules, 1986\nAs Amended, except for undefended divorce petitions;\nc.  all applications made in connection with bankruptcy and winding\nup proceedings, except for the hearing of a creditor\u2019s winding up\npetition;\nd.  the trial of all actions begun by originating summons;\ne.  the trial of all applications for judicial review, applications for\nwrits of habeus corpus and appeals to the Grand Court governed\nby GCR O.55 and 56; and\nf.  any other application (not being one specified in paragraph 1.2) in\nrespect of which the Listing Officer requires a Listing Form to be\ncompleted.\n1.2 This practice direction shall not apply to \u2014\na.  the trial of actions begun by writ in respect of which GCR O.34\ncontinues to apply;\nb.  undefended divorce petitions;\nc.  creditors\u2019 winding up petitions;\nd.  applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal;\ne.  appeals from the Summary Court; and\nf.  applications under Section 4 of the Confidential Information\nDisclosure Act (as amended and revised).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2000\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 52\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n1.3 This practice direction shall come into force on 3rd January, 2000.\n2 Introduction\n\n2.1 The position of \u201cListing Officer\u201d was created to ensure efficient use of\ncourt time. The Listing Officer\u2019s ability to carry out this function is directly\nrelated to the information provided by attorneys regarding their cases. When\ncase information is incomplete, listing difficulties arise.\n\n3 New Practice\n3.1 As a consequence of the above, all requests for court dates must be\naccompanied by a completed Listing Form.\n\n4 Listing Form\n4.1 The Listing Form shall be in Practice Form 1\/00.\n4.2 In the case of any ex parte application or any proceeding begun by\npetition, the Listing Form shall be completed by the attorneys acting for the\napplicant or petitioner as the case may be.\n4.3 In the case of any inter partes application or the trial of any originating\nsummons in respect of which the respondent has filed a notice of intention\nto defend, the listing form shall be completed and signed by the attorneys\nacting for both the applicant and all the respondents.\n\nDated this _____ day of December, 1999.\n\n___________________________________\nThe Hon. Chief Justice Anthony Smellie\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 53\n\n GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n(GCR O.1, r.l2)\nGUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS\n(GCR O.62, r. 17)\n\n1. Introduction\n1.1 These Guidelines are made pursuant to GCR Order 62, rule 17 and are\nintended to be a comprehensive code relating to the procedure in\nrespect of taxation; the form and content of bills of costs; and the nature\nand amount of fees, charges, disbursements, expenses, or remuneration\nwhich may be allowed on taxation.\n1.2 These Guidelines have no application to bills of costs relating to work\ndone before 1st January 2002, (\"the Commencement Date\") which will\nbe taxed in accordance with the schedule to the Grand Court (Taxation\nof Costs) Rules 1995.\n1.3 Where an order for costs relates to work done both before and after the\nCommencement Date, it will normally be appropriate to prepare two\nseparate bills of costs.\n1.4 Words and expressions used in these Guidelines shall have the meaning\nascribed to them by GCR O.1, r.7 and GCR O.62, r.3 as the case may\nbe.\n1.5 These Guidelines apply both to taxations on the standard basis and\ntaxations on the indemnity basis. The only distinction between a\ntaxation on this basis is (a) the difference in the burden of proof and (b)\nthe application of maximum hourly rates for attorneys\u2019 fees in the case\nof taxations on the standard basis.\n\n2. Structure of a bill of costs\n2.1 A bill of costs should distinguish between legal fees and disbursements.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 54\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.2. A bill of costs may be drawn up in CI$ or US$ (referred to as \"the\ncurrency of the bill\"). Costs incurred in any other currency must be\ntranslated into the currency of the bill at the exchange rate ruling on the\ndate of the bill. The CI$\/US$ exchange rate is fixed at 0.82.\n2.3 The bill should contain an introduction which describes the nature of\nthe litigation sufficient to enable the taxing officer to gain a proper\nunderstanding\n2.4 The work done and disbursements incurred should be itemised and set\nout chronologically.\n2.5 The lawyers engaged should be identified sufficiently to enable the\ntaxing officer to determine the appropriate hourly rate(s) for work done\nby each of them.\n2.6 Each item of work done should be described. The number of hours\nworked on each item by each lawyer or paralegal should be stated,\ntogether with the applicable hourly rates.\n2.7 The bill should be divided into five columns as follows:\n(a)  Column 1 should contain the item number.\n(b) Column 2 should contain a description of each item of work\narranged chronologically; the date(s) on which or period(s) during\nwhich it was done; the identity of the person(s) doing the work; the\ntime spent; and the applicable hourly rates.\n(c)  Column 3 should contain the total amount claimed in respect of the\nitem.\n(d)  Column 4 is for use by the paying party and should be left blank.\n(e)  Column 5 is for use by the taxing officer and should be left blank.\n2.8 When the item comprises a disbursement it should be described in\nColumn 2 and the amount claimed should be stated in Column 3.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 55\n\n2.9 Whenever possible, the paying party's response should be summarised\nin Column 4. The word \"Agreed\" should be inserted to indicate that the\nitem and the amount claimed in respect of it are agreed in all respects.\n\"Not agreed\" shall be taken to mean that the item should be disallowed\nin toto. The paying party may insert a lower dollar amount to indicate\nthat the amount claimed should be reduced because the time spent is\nexcessive and\/or the hourly rate(s) is excessive.\n2.10 A brief explanation of the paying party's objection should be included\nin Column 4.\n2.11 Where appropriate, the paying party should explain or elaborate upon\nthat party\u2019s objection by a separate statement in writing.\n2.12 The taxing officer will insert in Column 5 the amount allowed in\nrespect of each item.\n2.13 The successful party's bill of costs must contain a declaration signed\nby that party\u2019s attorney to the effect that\n(a) the bill is accurate and complete; and\n(b) the amount sought in the bill does not exceed the successful party\u2019s\nincurred costs.\n2.14 Having completed Column 4, the paying party's attorney must also sign\nthe bill of costs.\n2.15 Wherever possible, copies of bills of costs should be served in the form\nof a computer disk or by e-mail.\n\n3. Procedure for serving and lodging bills of costs\n3.1 The successful party must serve that party\u2019s bill of costs on the paying\nparty personally or upon the paying party\u2019s attorney.\n3.2 Where more than one party is liable jointly or severally to pay the whole\nor part of the costs, a copy of the bill of costs shall be served on every\npaying party.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 56\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.3 Unless the bill of costs is exceptionally long or complex, the paying\nparty should complete Column 4 and return it to the successful party\nwithin 21 days.\n3.4 Unless the total amount payable is agreed, the successful party must\nlodge the bill of costs for taxation within 14 days of receiving it back\nfrom the paying party.\n3.5 If the paying party fails to respond within 21 days or such longer period\nas may be agreed between the parties or allowed by the taxing officer,\nthe successful party may apply for a default costs certificate.\n3.6 The paying party may not participate in a taxation unless and until the\npaying party has completed Column 4 of the bill of costs.\n\n4. Procedure on taxation\n4.1 A taxation shall be inquisitorial in nature.\n4.2 The taxing officer shall control the procedure applicable to each taxation\nwhich will not necessarily involve any oral hearing.\n4.3 The taxing officer will investigate each item in the bill of costs unless it\nis agreed and determine what amount, if any, shall be allowed in respect\nof it.\n4.4 If the paying party has failed to complete Column 4 of the bill of costs\nor failed to respond to any particular item within the prescribed time\nlimit, the taxing officer will proceed to taxation on the assumption that\nthe bill or particular item, as the case may be, is \"Agreed\".\n4.5 The taxing officer will require the successful party to justify each item\nin whatever way appears to the taxing officer to be appropriate. The\nsuccessful party may be required to give an oral explanation and\/or\nmake written submissions and\/or produce supporting documents of the\nkind referred to in rule 30(3).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 57\n\n4.6 For the purposes of justifying a bill of costs no distinction is to be drawn\nbetween work done by foreign lawyers and that done by local attorneys.\nOriginal files belonging to foreign lawyers must be produced if\nrequired by the taxing officer, failing which the amount claimed will\nbe disallowed.\n4.7 The taxing officer may require the production of files or individual\ndocuments which are privileged, but the taxing officer should not\ndisclose them to the paying party.\n4.8 The taxing officer will require the paying party to justify the paying\nparty\u2019s objections to the bill of costs in whatever way appears to the\ntaxing officer to be appropriate. The paying party may be required to\nexplain the paying party's objections in writing and\/or make oral\nsubmissions to the taxing officer.\n4.9 The successful party will be required to produce to the taxing officer\nand disclose to the paying party all necessary invoices and receipts in\nrespect of the disbursements claimed in the bill of costs. The successful\nparty may also be required to produce the actual invoices rendered by\nthe successful party\u2019s attorney and foreign lawyers and to reconcile the\namount claimed in the bill of costs with the amount specified in the\ninvoices.\n\n5. Procedure for Taxation of Costs Payable out of a Fund\n5.1 When the costs of a trustee, personal representative or official liquidator\nare ordered to be paid out of a fund and taxed on the indemnity basis,\nthe Bill of Costs should be prepared in accordance with Section 2 of\nthese Guidelines.\n5.2 The Bill of Costs should be served on the person (if any) designated for\nthis purpose, such as a representative beneficiary in the case of costs\npayable out of a trust fund or the creditors' committee in the case of\ncosts payable out of the assets of an insolvent company.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 58\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.3 In cases where the trustee, personal representative or official liquidator\nis required to serve their Bill of Costs, that person may apply for a\ndefault costs certificate or a certificate for costs in an agreed amount as\nmay be appropriate.\n5.4 In any other case, the trustee personal representative or official\nliquidator must make an application for taxation, in which case the\nprocedure contained in Section 4 of these Practice Directions will\napply.\n\n6. Disbursements\n6.1 An expense may be claimed as a disbursement on taxation if:\n(a)  it was reasonably and properly incurred by the successful party's\nattorney in the course of conducting the proceedings; and\n(b)  it is not an expense of a kind which is customarily included in the\noverheads reflected in attorneys\u2019 hourly rates and is therefore\ndeemed to be reflected in the hourly rates charged by the successful\nparty's attorney.\n6.2 The amount claimed in respect of any disbursement shall not exceed the\nactual amount paid by the successful party who may be required to\nproduce a receipt or other documents evidencing the amount paid.\n6.3 Notwithstanding paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 above, the following sums may\nbe claimed as disbursements:\n(a)  photocopying charges - up to 50\u00a2 per page;\n(b)  printing charges - up to 50\u00a2 per page;\n(c)  telephone and fax charges - the amount of the call charge plus a\nmark up not exceeding 20%;\n(d)  transcripts produced by court reporters - up to CI$3.50 per page.\n6.4 Legal fees paid to foreign lawyers cannot be claimed as disbursements\nunless the foreign lawyer is engaged to give an opinion on a point of\nforeign law which is in issue in the proceedings.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 59\n\n6.5 Admission fees and work permit fees paid in respect of foreign lawyers\nare not recoverable on taxation on the basis that such expenses are part\nof the overheads reflected in the foreign lawyer's hourly rates.\n6.6 Work permit fees paid in respect of expert witnesses are recoverable.\n\n7. Attorney's fees\n7.1 The amount of attorney's fees allowable on taxation on the standard\nbasis shall be determined on the basis of time spent. The unit of time\nused in a bill of costs may be 1\/10 hour or \u00bc hour.\n7.2 Amounts claimed on the basis of brief fees, refreshers, lump sums,\npercentages, conditional fee agreements, contingency agreements or\nany basis other than hourly rates will be disallowed.\n7.3 In the case of taxations on the standard basis, the hourly rates to be\napplied will be determined on the basis of the post qualification\nexperience of the persons engaged as follows:\n\nMore than 15 years\n\nUp to CI$300 or US$365\n\nBetween 10 and 15 years\n\nUp to CI$275 or US$335\n\nBetween 5 and 10 years\n\nUp to CI$250 or US$305\n\nLess than 5 years\n\nUp to CI$150 or US$185\n\nArticled Clerks and Paralegals\n\nUP to CI$ 90 or US$110\n\nThese are maximum rates. The taxing officer may, in the exercise of\nthe taxing officer\u2019s discretion, determine that lower rates are\nappropriate in any particular case. The number of years postqualification experience shall be reckoned from the date upon which\nthe attorney was first admitted to practice as a professional lawyer\neither in the Cayman Islands or elsewhere. King\u2019s Counsel shall be\ntreated as attorneys having more than 15 years post qualification\nexperience.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 60\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n7.4  In the case of taxations on the indemnity basis, the hourly rate or scale\nof rates will be that agreed between the attorney and that attorney\u2019s\nclient provided that such rate or scale is not unreasonable. The mere\nfact that the agreed rate is higher than the maximum rate(s) allowable\non a taxation on the standard basis shall not be regarded as evidence\nthat it is unreasonable.\n7.5  In determining the amount allowable in respect of each item in a bill of\ncosts the taxing officer shall have regard to both the experience of the\nperson undertaking the work and the nature of the work undertaken.\nFor example, work done by an attorney of more than 15 years\nexperience which could equally well have been done by a paralegal or\njunior attorney will be allowed at the appropriate lower hourly rate.\nHowever, the taxing officer will take into account that routine tasks\ndone by paralegals and junior attorneys need to be directed and\nsupervised by experienced attorneys.\n7.6 Work done by articled clerks or trainees is not recoverable on taxation\nunless it is work of a kind which would normally be done by paralegals.\n7.7 The cost of routine typing and file maintenance done by secretaries\ncomprises part of the overheads reflected in the hourly rates for\nattorneys and is therefore not recoverable on taxation.\n7.8 The cost of organising, cataloguing and filing documents for the\npurposes of discovery, inspection and\/or trial is recoverable on\ntaxation.\n\n8. Work done by persons other than attorneys\n8.1 Legal work done by \"in-house counsel\" who are in the employment of\nthe successful party is not normally recoverable on taxation. It will only\nbe recoverable if the successful party can satisfy the taxing officer that\nit is work of a kind which would otherwise be done by outside lawyers.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 61\n\nFor example, the work involved in instructing outside lawyers is not\nrecoverable; time spent receiving and considering advice from outside\nlawyers is not recoverable; but time spent preparing a draft list of\ndocuments under the supervision of outside lawyers may be\nrecoverable.\n8.2 Investigative and other work done by non-lawyers will be recoverable\non taxation only to the extent that the Court has given a direction\npursuant to rule 18 that it should be allowed.\n\n9. Travelling and hotel expenses\n9.1 Reasonable travelling expenses incurred in bringing witnesses to the\nIslands or between the Islands shall be recoverable on taxation.\n9.2 Reasonable expenses incurred by witnesses travelling within Grand\nCayman or within Cayman Brac shall not be recoverable on taxation.\n9.3 Reasonable hotel expenses incurred in accommodating witnesses during\na hearing shall be recoverable on taxation, not exceeding US$250 per\nday. Only the accommodation element of the hotel charges may be\nrecovered.\n9.4 Travelling and hotel expenses paid to foreign lawyers shall not be\nrecoverable on taxation.\n\n10. Service of process\n10.1 The cost of serving process out of the jurisdiction is recoverable as a\ndisbursement.\n10.2 The cost of effecting personal service on an individual within the\njurisdiction is recoverable at the rate specified in Schedule 3 of the\nCourt Fees Rules (as amended and revised) whether the successful\nparty employs the bailiff or a private process server.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2001\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 62\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n10.3 The cost of serving process on the registered office of a company or\nupon a party's attorney and the cost of filing documents at court is not\nrecoverable on the basis that the cost of employing messengers is part\nof the overheads reflected in the attorney's hourly rates.\n\nIssued by The Rules Committee on the 22nd day of October, 2001.\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice\nThe Hon. David Ballantyne, Attorney General\nAndrew J. Jones, Esq., Legal Practitioner\nAlden M. McLaughlin, Esq., Legal Practitioner\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 63\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004\n(GCR O.1, r. 12)\nCORRECTIONS TO JUDGMENTS\n\n1.  Unless the judge otherwise sees fit, copies of written judgments will\nnow be made available before being released as finally approved to\nfacilitate the following:\n1.1 To enable the attorneys of the parties to consider the judgment and\ndecide what consequential orders they should seek. In appropriate\ncases the judge may impose conditions of confidentiality until the\njudgment is finally released or until the formal order is finally\nissued.\n1.2 To enable the attorneys of the parties to submit any written\nsuggestions to the judge about typing errors, wrong references of\nfact or citation of authority or other minor corrections of that kind\nin good time, so that, if the judge thinks fit, the judgment can be\ncorrected before it is finally handed down in open Court or\nChambers.\n\n2.  The same will apply to reasons for judgments.\n\n3.  Written suggestions for changes must be submitted within 72 hours of\nthe release of the judgment or reasons for judgment; unless the judge\notherwise directs in writing.\n\n4.  Judgments or reasons for judgments released on the foregoing basis\nwill on every page be stamped: \u201cUnapproved version: No permission\nis granted to publicise, copy, or use in Court\u201d.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2004\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 64\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.  None of the foregoing is intended to affect the discretion of the judge\nto issue errata in respect of written judgments or reasons for judgments\nfor errors which later come to the judge\u2019s attention but within a\nreasonable time after the formal delivery (for example, errors which\nmay be identified by the editors of the Law Reports). The intention is\nthat any such errata will be given within 4 weeks of the formal release\nof the judgment or reasons for judgment and will immediately be\nnotified to the attorneys and publishers of the Law Reports upon being\ngiven.\n\nDated this 17th day of March 2004\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC, Chief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 65\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\nPROCEEDINGS BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING CIVIL OR\nCRIMINAL\n\n 1. Introduction\n1.1 This practice direction applies to all applications seeking the\nsanction of the Court for the use of video conferencing (VCF).\n1.2 The purpose of this practice direction is to explain and clarify\ncertain procedures and arrangements necessary in this relatively\nnew method of taking evidence in trials or in other parts of any\nlegal proceedings, for example, interim application case\nmanagement conferences and pre-trial reviews. Further guidance\nis given in the Video Conferencing Guide appended to this practice\ndirection. 1.3 VCF equipment may be used both (a) in a courtroom,\nwhether via equipment which is permanently placed there or via a\nmobile unit, and (b) in a separate studio or conference room. In\neither case, the location at which the judge sits is referred to as the\n\u201clocal site\u201d. The other site or sites to and from which transmission\nis made are referred to as \u201cthe remote site\u201d and in any particular\ncase any such site may be another courtroom.\n2. Preliminary Arrangements\n2.1. The Court\u2019s permission is required for any part of any proceedings\nto be dealt with by means of VCF. Before seeking a direction, the\napplicant should notify the listing officer or other appropriate court\nofficer of the intention to seek it, and should enquire as to the\navailability of court VCF equipment for the day or days of the\nproposed VCF.\n2.2  The application should be made to any of the Judges of the Grand\nCourt. If all parties consent to a direction, permission can be sought\n\n1 See later amendments to the Evidence Law in 2004.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 66\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nby letter, fax or e-mail, although the Court may still require an oral\nhearing. All parties are entitled to be heard on whether or not such\na direction should be given and as to its terms. If a witness at a\nremote site is to give evidence by an interpreter, consideration\nshould be given at this stage as to whether the interpreter should\nbe at the local site or the remote site.\n2.3  If a VCF direction is given, arrangements for the transmission will\nthen need to be made. The Court will ordinarily direct that the party\nseeking permission to use VCF is to be responsible for this. That\nparty is hereafter \u2013 in civil cases \u2013 referred to as \u201cthe VCF\narranging party\u201d.\n2.4  The VCF arranging party must contact the listing officer or other\nappropriate officer of the court and make arrangements for the\nVCF transmission. Details of the remote site, and of the equipment\nto be used both at the local site (if not being supplied by the Court)\nand the remote site (including the number of ISDN lines and\nconnection speed), together with all the necessary contact names\nand telephone numbers, will have to be provided to the listing\nofficer or other court officer. The Court will need to be satisfied\nthat any equipment provided by the parties for use at the local site\nand also that at the remote site is of sufficient quality for a\nsatisfactory transmission.\n\n3. Costs\n3.1  Subject to any order to the contrary, all costs of the transmission,\nincluding the costs of hiring equipment and technical personnel to\noperate it, will initially be the responsibility of, and must be met\nby, the VCF arranging party. All reasonable efforts should be made\nto keep the transmission to a minimum and so keep the costs down.\nAll such costs will be considered to be part of the costs of the\nproceedings and the Court will determine at such subsequent time\nas is convenient or appropriate who, as between the parties, should\nbe responsible for them and (if appropriate) in what proportions.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 67\n\n4. Recording\n4.1  The VCF arranging party must arrange for recording equipment to\nbe provided by the Court so that the evidence may be recorded at\nthe local site.\n4.2  Application for a direction from the Court must be made for the\nprovision of recording equipment at the remote site by the\narranging party.\n4.3  No other recording may be made of any proceedings via VCF, save\nas directed by the Court.\n\nDated this 26th day of May 2004\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 68\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nVIDEO CONFERENCING GUIDE\n\nThis guidance is for the use of video conferencing (VCF) in civil\nproceedings. It is in part based upon the protocol of the Federal Court of\nAustralia and CPR 32 Practice Direction of the Courts of England and\nWales. It is intended to provide a guide to all persons involved in the use of\nVCF, although it does not attempt to cover all the practical questions that\nmay arise.\n\nVIDEO CONFERENCING GENERALLY\n1.  VCF may be a convenient way of dealing with any part of proceedings:\nit can involve considerable savings in time and cost. Its use for the\ntaking of evidence from overseas witnesses will, in particular, be likely\nto achieve a material saving of costs, and such savings may also be\nachieved by its use for taking domestic evidence. It is, however,\ninevitably not as ideal as having the witness physically present in court.\nIts convenience should not therefore be allowed to dictate its use. A\njudgment must be made in every case in which the use of VCF is being\nconsidered not only as to whether it will achieve an overall cost saving,\nbut as to whether its use will be likely to be beneficial to the efficient,\nfair and economic disposal of the litigation. In particular, it needs to be\nrecognised that the degree of control a court can exercise over a witness\nat the remote site is or may be more limited than it can exercise over a\nwitness physically before it.\n2.  When used for the taking of evidence, the objective should be to make\nthe VCF session as close as possible to the usual practice in a trial court\nwhere evidence is taken in open court. To gain the maximum benefit,\nseveral differences have to be taken into account. Some matters, which\nare taken for granted when evidence is taken in the conventional way,\ntake on a different dimension when it is taken by VCF: for example,\nthe administration of the oath, ensuring that the witness understands\nwho is at the local site and what their various roles are, the raising of\nany objections to the evidence and the use of the documents.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 69\n\n3.  It should be presumed that all foreign governments are willing to allow\ntheir nationals or others within their jurisdiction to be examined before\na court on the Cayman Islands by means of VCF. If there is any doubt\nabout this, enquiries should be directed to the Foreign and\nCommonwealth Office (International Legal Matters Unit, Consular\nDivision) with a view to ensuring that the country from which the\nevidence is to be taken raises no objection to it at diplomatic level. The\nVCF arranging party will be required to make all necessary inquiries\nabout this well in advance of the VCF and must be able to inform the\ncourt what those inquiries were and of their outcome.\n4.  Time zone differences need to be considered when a witness abroad is\nto be examined in Cayman via VCF. The convenience of the witness,\nthe parties, their representatives and the court must all be taken into\naccount. The cost of the use of a commercial studio is usually greater\noutside normal working hours.\n5.  Those involved with VCF need to be aware that, even with the most\nadvanced systems currently available, there are the briefest of delays\nbetween the receipt of the picture and that of the accompanying sound.\nIf due allowance is not made for this, there will be a tendency to \u201cspeak\nover\u201d the witness, whose voice will continue to be heard for a\nmillisecond or so after that witness appears on the screen to have\nfinished speaking.\n6.  With current technology, picture quality is good, but not as good as\ntelevision picture. The quality of the picture is enhanced if those\nappearing on VCF monitors keep their movements to a minimum.\n\nPRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS\n7.  The VCF arranging party must ensure that an appropriate person will\nbe present at the local site to supervise the operation of the VCF\nthroughout the transmission in order to deal with any technical\nproblems.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 70\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n8.  It is recommended that the judge, practitioners and witness should\narrive at their respective VCF sites about 20 minutes prior to the\nscheduled commencement of the transmission.\n9. If the local site is not a courtroom, but a conference room or studio, the\njudge will need to determine who is to sit where. The VCF arranging\nparty must take care to ensure that the number of microphones is\nadequate for the speakers and that the panning of the camera for the\npractitioners\u2019 table encompass all legal representatives so that the\nviewer can see everyone seated there.\n10. The proceedings, wherever they may take place, form part of a trial to\nwhich the public is entitled to have access (unless the court has\ndetermined that they should be heard in private). If the local site is to\nbe a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party must ensure\nthat it provides sufficient accommodation to enable a reasonable\nnumber of members of the public to attend.\n11. In cases where the local site is a studio or conference room, the VCF\narranging party should make arrangements, if practicable, for the Royal\nCoat of Arms to be placed above the judge\u2019s seat.\n12. In cases where the VCF is to be used for the taking of evidence, the VCF\narranging party must arrange for recording equipment to be provided\nby the court so that the evidence can be recorded. An associate will\nnormally be present to operate the recording equipment when the local\nsite is a courtroom. The VCF arranging party should take steps to\nensure that an associate is present to do likewise when it is a studio or\nconference room. The equipment should be set up and tested before the\nVCF transmission. It will often be a valuable safeguard for the VCF\narranging party also to arrange for the provision of recording equipment\nat the remote site. This will provide a useful back-up if there is any\nreduction in sound quality during the transmission. A direction from\nthe court for the making of such a back-up recording must, however,\nbe obtained first. This is because the proceedings are court proceedings\nand, save as directed by the court no other recording of them must be\nmade. The court will direct what is to happen to the back-up recording.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 71\n\n13. Some countries may require that any oath or affirmation to be taken by\na witness accord with local custom rather than the usual form of oath\nor affirmation used in the Cayman Islands. The VCF arranging party\nmust make all appropriate prior enquiries and put in place all\narrangements necessary to enable the oath or affirmation to be taken in\naccordance with local custom. That party must be in a position to\ninform the court what those inquiries were, what their outcome was and\nwhat arrangements have been made. If the oath or affirmation can be\nadministered in the manner normal in the Cayman Islands, the VCF\narranging party must arrange in advance to have the appropriate holy\nbook at the remote site. The associate will normally administer the oath.\n14. Consideration will need to be given in advance to the documents to\nwhich the witness is likely to be referred. The parties should endeavour\nto agree on this. It will usually be most convenient for a bundle of the\ncopy documents to be prepared in advance, which the VCF arranging\nparty should then send to the remote site.\n15. Additional documents are sometimes quite properly introduced during\nthe course of a witness\u2019s evidence. To cater for this, the VCF arranging\nparty should ensure that equipment is available to enable the documents\nto be transmitted between sites during the course of the VCF\ntransmission. Consideration should be given to whether to use a\ndocument camera. If it is decided to use one, arrangements for its use\nwill need to be established in advance. The panel operator will need to\nknow the number and size of documents or objects if their images are\nto be sent by document camera. In many cases, a simpler and sufficient\nalternative will be to ensure that there are fax transmission and\nreception facilities at the participating sites.\n\nTHE HEARING\n16. The procedure for conducting the transmission will be determined by\nthe Judge. The Judge will determine who is to control the cameras. In\ncases where the VCF is being used for an application in the course of\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 20041\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 72\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthe proceedings, the Judge will ordinarily not enter the local site until\nboth sites are online. Similarly, at the conclusion of the hearing, the\nJudge will ordinarily leave the local site while both sites are still on\nline. The following paragraphs apply primarily to cases where the VCF\nis being used for the taking of the evidence of a witness at a remote site.\nIn all cases, the judge will need to decide whether court dress is\nappropriate when using VCF facilities.\n\nIt might be appropriate when transmitting from courtroom to\ncourtroom. It might not be when a commercial facility is being used.\n17. At the beginning of the transmission, the Judge will probably wish to\nintroduce themselves and the advocates to the witness. The Judge will\nprobably want to know who is at the remote site and will invite the\nwitness to introduce themselves and anyone else who is with them. The\nJudge may wish to give directions as to the seating arrangements at the\nremote site so that those present are visible at the local site during the\ntaking of the evidence. The Judge will probably wish to explain to the\nwitness the method of taking the oath or of affirming, the manner in\nwhich the evidence is taken, and who will be conducting the\nexamination and cross-examination. The Judge will probably also wish\nto inform the witness of the matters referred to in paragraph 5 and 6\nabove (co-ordination of picture with sound, and picture quality).\n18. The examination of the witness at the remote site should follow as\nclosely as possible the practice adopted when a witness is in the\ncourtroom.\nDuring\nexamination,\ncross-examination\nand\nreexamination, the witness must be able to see the legal representative\nasking the question and also any other person (whether another legal\nrepresentative or the judge) making any statements in regard to the\nwitness\u2019 evidence. It will in practice be most convenient if everyone\nremains seated throughout the transmission.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 73\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2006\n(GCR O. 42)\nORDERS\n\nOrders that are not encompassed by GCR O. 42, r. 5(5) or 5A should be in\nthe following format:\n\nUnder the style of cause:\n\n\u201cIN CHAMBERS\/IN GRAND COURT\nDATE OF ORDER\nBEFORE HON. JUSTICE\nORDER\n\nUPON hearing counsel for the applicant etc.\n\nIT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:\n\nDATED the\nFILED the\n_______________________\nJUDGE OF THE GRAND COURT\u201d\n\nAnd on a separate page, not forming part of the order:\n\nApproved as to form and content: etc.\u201d\n\nOrders that are encompassed by GCR O. 42, r. 5(5) or 5A should include\nthe indorsement \u201cApproved as to form and content\u201d after the signature line\nof the Clerk of the Court as the indorsement forms part of the order.\n\nDated this 24th day of October 2006\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie, Chief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 74\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2008\n(GCR O.1,r.12)\nREGISTER OF JUDGEMENTS - REGISTER OF WRITS\n(GCR O.63, rr. 7 & 8)\n\n1.  The Register of Judgements and the Register of Writs and other\noriginating process are open to public inspection. The purpose of this\nrule is that the existence of all legal proceedings, including the identity\nof the parties and the general nature of the causes of action, and the\nmanner in which the Court finally adjudicated upon those proceedings\nshould be a matter of public record.\n2.  It is therefore important that the information filed on these registers is\nboth complete and accurate.\n3.  The Clerk of the Court has been instructed to ensure that all final\njudgements and orders are placed on the Register, including default\njudgements and consent orders in respect of which there are no written\nreasons.\n4.  Whenever a writ, petition, originating summons and originating motion\nis amended, the amended pleading must also be placed on the Register,\notherwise readers are likely to be misled about the identity of the parties\nand\/or the true nature of the causes of action. For the same reason,\ncounterclaims and third party notices are required to be placed on the\nRegister. The Clerk of the Court has been instructed to ensure that all\npleadings by which new causes of action and\/or new parties are or may\nbe added, are placed on the Register, including amended pleadings,\ncounterclaims and third party notices.\n\nDated this 31st day of October 2008\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC,\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 75\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nSCHEMES OF ARRANGEMENT AND COMPROMISE UNDER\nSECTION 86 OF THE COMPANIES ACT\n(GCR O.102, r.20)\n1 Introduction\n1.1 This practice direction supersedes Practice Direction No.1 of 2002\n(issued on 4th July 2002) which is hereby revoked.\n1.2 The sole purpose of replacing Practice Direction No.1 of 2002 is to\nprovide more detailed directions and guidance about matters which will\nbe considered by the Court at the first hearing of a petition for an order\nsanctioning a scheme of arrangement. Practitioners are referred in\nparticular to paragraphs 3.1 to 3.5 below.\n1.3 This practice direction will apply to proceedings commenced and\/or\nhearings taking place on or after 1st October 2010.\n2 Commencing proceedings\n2.1 The previous practice of the Court, whereby the applications for an order\nconvening the Court meeting and the sanction of the scheme of\narrangement were treated as two entirely separate proceedings, was\nabolished by Practice Direction No.1\/2002. These applications will\ncontinue be made in the same proceeding, thus resulting in the creation\nof a single Court file.\n2.2 The proceeding will be commenced by petition seeking the Court\u2019s\nsanction of a proposed scheme of arrangement or compromise. At the\nsame time as filing a petition, the applicant must file an interlocutory\nsummons for an order convening the Court meeting(s). As part of the\ndirections given on this application, the Court will fix a date for the\nsubstantive hearing of the petition, notice of which will be given to the\nshareholders\/creditors as part of the scheme documentation.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 76\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.3  Within seven days after the Court meeting(s) has or have been held, the\napplicant must file an affidavit sworn by the Chairperson of the\nmeeting(s) verifying that notice was duly sent in accordance with the\norder for directions; that the meeting(s) was or were duly held; and\ngiving particulars of the result. In the event that the scheme was not\napproved, the applicant will also formally ask for the petition to be\ndismissed. In the event that the scheme was approved, the substantive\nhearing of the petition will take place on the pre-determined date. In\nmost cases it should be unnecessary to file any further evidence.\n3 Matters to be determined at the first Hearing\n3.1  The first hearing (on the interlocutory summons for an order to convene\nthe Court meeting) will normally be heard ex parte, but practitioners\nshould consider giving notice to persons affected by the scheme in\ncases where class or other issues as referred to in paragraph 3.3 below\narise, and where it is practical to do so. Such notice should include a\nstatement of the intention to promote the scheme and of its purpose,\nand also of the proposed composition of classes and of the intention to\nraise any issue as referred to in paragraph 3.3 below.\n3.2 In every case the Court will consider whether it is appropriate to\nconvene class meetings and, if so, the composition of the classes so as\nto ensure that each meeting consists of shareholders or creditors whose\nrights against the company which are to be released or varied under the\nscheme, or the new rights which the scheme gives in their place, are\nnot so dissimilar as to make it impossible for them to consult together\nwith a view to their common interest. It follows that the supporting\naffidavit must contain all such information as may be necessary to\nenable the Court to make this determination. The applicant should also\nraise at the first hearing any other matter which may affect the conduct\nof the meeting(s).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 77\n\n3.3 At the first hearing, the Court will also consider any other issue which\nis relevant to the jurisdiction of the Court to sanction the scheme, and\nany other issue which, although not strictly going to jurisdiction, is such\nthat it would unquestionably lead the Court to refuse to sanction the\nscheme.\n3.4 It is the responsibility of the applicant by evidence in support of the\napplication or otherwise to draw the attention of the Court to any issue\nin relation to the meeting(s) or any issue in paragraph 3.3 above. Unless\nthe applicant\u2019s case in relation to the meeting(s) or any issue in\nparagraph 3.3 above is a plain and obvious one, the applicant\u2019s counsel\nshould provide the Court with a skeleton argument addressing the\nrelevant issues.\n3.5 The Court will, if necessary, give directions for the resolution of any\nsuch issues including, if necessary, directions for the postponement of\nmeeting(s) until that resolution has been achieved, and will hear\ninterested parties. The Court will expect any person who raises any\nsuch issue at the hearing to sanction the scheme to show good cause\nwhy they did not raise it at an earlier stage.\n3.6 The Court will consider whether the proposed time and place of the\nCourt meeting(s) and the method of giving notice is appropriate in all\nthe circumstances. The test is whether the parties having the economic\ninterest, which is typically not the registered holder of the shares or\ndebt instruments, will have sufficient time in which to consider the\nscheme documentation and make an informed decision. Where\nnecessary, the Court should be provided with evidence of the\n\u201cshareholder\/creditor profile\u201d. In cases where the relevant shares or\ndebt instruments are listed on a stock exchange, the Court must be\nprovided with all necessary evidence upon which to satisfy itself that\nthe proposed notice period and method of giving notice will comply\nwith applicable rules.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 78\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.7 The applicant must satisfy the Court that the scheme documentation will\nprovide the shareholder\/creditor (which for this purpose means the\nperson having the ultimate economic interest) with all the information\nreasonably necessary to enable them to make an informed decision\nabout the merits of the proposed scheme. Since this application will\ntypically be made ex parte, the applicant\u2019s counsel must draw the\nCourt\u2019s attention to any aspects of the explanatory memorandum or\nproxy statement which might arguably depart from best practice.\n3.8 If the proposed scheme relates to shares or debt instruments which are\nlisted on a stock exchange, the applicant must file evidence which sets\nout the relevant listing rules and practice and explains the steps which\nhave been or will be taken to comply with such listing rules or practice.\nThe Court will always require to know whether the proposed\nexplanatory memorandum or proxy statement requires the approval of\nthe relevant stock exchange and, if so, whether such approval has been\nobtained.\n3.9 If one of the proposed class meetings consists of a small number of\npersons who are all willing to be bound by the terms of the scheme, the\nCourt may, in its discretion, waive the requirement for a formal class\nmeeting to be held of that particular class if the evidence before it at the\nfirst hearing shows that all of the particular members in question\nconsent to be bound by the terms of the scheme.\n4 \u201cLooking through the Register\u201d\n4.1  GCR O.102, r.20 (6) confirms the existing practice of the Court which\nis to \u201clook through the Register\u201d in appropriate cases for the purpose\nof determining whether or not the statutory majorities have been\nachieved.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 79\n\n4.2  In the past there has been some uncertainty about the way in which the\nCourt will interpret and apply the statutory provisions in cases where\nthe whole or substantially the whole of the relevant shares are\nregistered with custodians or clearing houses such as Euroclear and\nClearstream Luxembourg (previously known as Cedel). In the case of\nschemes involving creditors, similar uncertainty has arisen in cases\nwhere the scheme relates to a global note and where the whole of the\ndebt instruments are registered with a single trustee. In such cases the\nCourt will \u201clook through the register\u201d for the purpose of determining\nwhether or not the statutory majorities have been achieved and any\nnecessary directions for this purpose will be given at the hearing of the\ninterlocutory summons.\n4.3 For example, the Court may direct that the custodian be permitted to\nvote both for and against the scheme in accordance with the instructions\nreceived from its clients and proxy forms should be prepared\naccordingly. In such cases the scheme documentation should include a\nform of voting instructions for use by custodians.\n4.4 Custodians and clearing houses may be required to specify both the\nnumber of clients or members from whom they have received\ninstructions in addition to the number of shares voted. The majority in\nnumber will be calculated on the basis of the number of clients or\nmembers giving instructions to the custodian or clearing house. The\nCourt understands that both Euroclear and Clearstream Luxembourg\nare content to proceed in this way. In cases involving other custodians\nor clearing houses, the Court will require evidence that the custodian\nor clearing house is willing and able to give effect to the Court\u2019s\ndirections.\n5 Hearing the Petition\n5.1 The substantive hearing of the petition will take place in open court.\n5.2 The date for the substantive hearing of the petition will be fixed at or\nbefore the hearing of the interlocutory summons for a direction\nconvening the Court meeting(s).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2010\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 80\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.3 Notice of the hearing date should be included in the scheme\ndocumentation, thus avoiding any subsequent need to publish\nadvertisements. The explanatory memorandum or proxy statement\nshould draw attention to the fact that shareholders or creditors will have\nthe right to attend and be heard on the hearing of the petition.\n5.4 GCR O.102, r.20 (10) provides that any person who voted at the Court\nmeeting and any person who gave voting instructions to a custodian or\nclearing house who voted at the Court meeting, shall be entitled to be\nheard on the petition. In addition, the Court may be prepared to hear\nany other person whom it is satisfied has a substantial economic interest\nin the shares or debt instruments to which the scheme relates.\n6 Miscellaneous\n6.1  The Court is prepared in appropriate cases to direct that Court meetings\nbe held outside the Cayman Islands.\n6.2 Relevant extracts from the company\u2019s memorandum and articles of\nassociation should be exhibited to the supporting affidavit. It is not\nnecessary to exhibit the whole of the memorandum and articles of\nassociation in every case.\n\nDated this 17th day of September 2010\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie QC,\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 1 OF 2011\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 81\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2011\n(GCR O. 1, r. 12)\nGUIDELINES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF COSTS\n(GCR O.62, r.16)\n\n1.  This Practice Direction concerns taxation of costs on the standard basis\nin respect of work carried out by attorneys on or after 1 June 2011, and\nin respect of such work paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction No 1 of\n2001 shall no longer apply. In respect of taxation of costs on the\nstandard basis in respect of work carried out by attorneys before 1 June\n2011 paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 shall continue\nto apply.\n2.  Save for the amendments effected by paragraph 1 of this Practice\nDirection, Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 shall continue to apply.\n3.  The hourly rates to be applied will continue to be determined on the\nbasis of the post-qualification experience of the person engaged as\nfollows:\n\nCivil Division and Family Division\nMore than 20 years\n\nUp to CI$443 or US$540\nBetween 15 and 20 years\n\nUp to CI$426 or US$520\nBetween 10 and 15 years\n\nUp to CI$361 or US$440\nBetween 5 and 10 years\n\nUp to CI$308 or US$375\nFewer than 5 years\n\nUp to CI$230 or US$280\nArticled Clerks and Paralegals\n\nUp to CI$156 or US$190\n\nFinancial Services Division and Admiralty Division\nMore than 20 years\n\nUp to CI$738 or US$900\nBetween 15 and 20 years\n\nUp to CI$705 or US$860\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 1 OF 2011\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 82\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nBetween 10 and 15 years\n\nUp to CI$599 or US$730\nBetween 5 and 10 years\n\nUp to CI$513 or US$625\nFewer than 5 years\n\nUp to CI$377 or US$460\nArticled Clerks and Paralegals\n\nUp to CI$262 or US$320\n\nIn each case these are maximum rates.\n\nIf in any proceedings, or part of proceedings, in the Civil Division or in the\nFamily Division the Judge is satisfied that the proceedings, or that part of\nthe proceedings, were unusually important or unusually complex, the Judge\nmay certify that with respect to any one or more of the persons engaged the\nmaximum allowable rates shall be those applicable in the Financial Services\nDivision.\n\nIn any proceedings in any Division the taxing officer may, in the exercise\nof the taxing officer\u2019s discretion, determine that rates lower than the\nmaximum rates are appropriate in any particular case.\n\nThe number of years post-qualification experience for attorneys shall be\nreckoned from the date upon which the attorney was first admitted to\npractice as an attorney in the Cayman Islands or as a professional legal\nadviser elsewhere, whichever is the earlier. King's Counsel shall be treated\nas attorneys having more than 20 years post-qualification experience.\nIssued by the Rules Committee on the 14 of April 2011\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice\nThe Hon. Samuel Bulgin, Q.C., Attorney General\nGraham Ritchie, Q.C., Legal Practitioner\nColin D. McKie, Legal Practitioner\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 83\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012\n DELIVERY OF RESERVED JUDGMENTS\n\nIt is now the established practice that reserved judgments arising from cases\nin the Financial Services, Civil and Family Divisions of the Grand Court\nwill be delivered within two to three (2-3) months. In the Criminal Division\nof the Grand Court, the established practice is that reserved judgments are\ndelivered as soon as practicably possible and in any event within one (1)\nmonth.\nReserved judgments arising from criminal cases in the Summary Court are\nexpected to be delivered within three (3) weeks and those arising from civil\ncases, within two to three (2-3) months.\nIn the Court of Appeal, the established practice is that judgments not\ndelivered by the end of the session in which they are reserved, will usually\nbe delivered by the end of the next session.\nWhile it is the policy of the judiciary that these established practices shall\nbe maintained, it must also be recognised that countervailing circumstances\nwill sometimes arise.\nWith the foregoing considerations in mind, the following practice directions\nare issued:\n(i)   A judge or magistrate should strive to deliver reserved judgments as\nsoon as possible and in any event within such periods as are\nrespectively mentioned above or as may from time to time be\nprescribed by the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of Appeal,\nas the case may be. If the judge or magistrate becomes aware that\njudicial commitments (or other circumstances) may prevent delivery of\njudgments within that time, the Chief Justice (or the President) should\nbe alerted to that possibility. Arrangements will then be put in place to\nsecure that the objectives of this Practice Direction are met.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 84\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(ii)  In keeping with these objectives, the Listing policy of the Grand and\nSummary Courts must also be adapted. To that end, it is also now\ndirected that time for the preparation of judgments, commensurate with\nthe complexity and length of time taken for a hearing or trial, shall be\nreserved immediately following the conclusion of the hearing or trial.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\nThe Cayman Islands\n\n7th March 2012\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 85\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012\nPROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\u2028IN WHICH THE JUDGE\nPRESIDES FROM OVERSEAS\nIn keeping with the Grand Court (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2011 which\nconfirm the jurisdiction of a judge who is physically outside the Islands to\nhold interlocutory hearings, the following shall apply:\n(i)   Following the directions of the Judge for the convening of the hearing,\nthe applicant's attorney shall make arrangements with the Registrar of\nthe Financial Services Division (or with the Clerk of Courts in respect\nof other Divisions) for the telecommunication link to be made (whether\nby telephone or televideo conference) (`the link').\n(ii)  The link may be made by use of \"Skype\" or similar service or by Cable\nand Wireless \"Call Centre\" or televideo conference service, as the\nJudge may direct. The costs of the link, if any, will be assumed in the\nfirst instance by the applicant and payment made upon presentation\nwith the monthly invoice by the Court Administration.\n(iii) All hearings will require attendance at Chambers by the applicant's\nattorney and (where appropriate or required, by the attorneys of other\nparties) and will be commenced by the engagement of the link to other\nparticipants as allowed by the Judge and to the Judge, at the time\nassigned. The Judge will then direct the conduct of the hearing.\n(iv)  Unless otherwise directed by the Judge, an accurate note of the hearing\nshall be kept by the applicant's attorney and presented to the Registrar\nfor acceptance by the Judge as the record of the hearing. For these\npurposes, a printed record provided by the Cable and Wireless Call\nCentre Services may, if accepted by the Judge, suffice.\n\nWhenever the Court's digital recorders are used for recording the\nhearing, the applicant's attorney may rely on that recording but will\nnonetheless be responsible for having the recording transcribed and\nsubmitted to the Registrar.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 86\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(v)  A marshal of the Court (or other court officer) assigned by the Registrar\nwith the agreement of the Judge, shall be present during the hearing to\nassist, if needs be, with the engagement of the link, with the recording\nof the proceedings and, as may be required, to assist the Judge.\n(vi) That officer will keep the log of the time of beginning and end of the\nlink for the purposes of record keeping and invoicing.\n(vii) All orders declared by the Judge shall be formally extracted by the\napplicant's attorney and presented to the Registry (where appropriate,\nwith the agreement of any other party) for acceptance and execution by\nthe Judge.\n(viii)  Together with the note of the hearing (as approved by the Judge), the\nformal orders will be entered and kept on the respective Court file as\npart of the record of the action.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nMarch 9 2012\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 87\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2012\nATTIRE FOR PROCEEDINGS IN THE GRAND COURT\n\nIn keeping with and in confirmation of the practice that has developed with\nthe agreement of the judges, the attire for proceedings in Chambers will be\nordinary business attire.\nThe attire for proceedings in Open Court will continue to be wig and gown,\nunless for some particular reason acceptable to the Judge, ordinary business\nattire is allowed.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nMarch 9 2012\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 88\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\nLIMITED ADMISSION AS AN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW\n\nSection 4(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised) (\"the\nLaw\") gives power to a Judge to admit a person as an Attorney-at-Law on\na limited basis for the purpose of a specified suit or matter in regard to which\nthat person has been instructed by a local Attorney-at-Law or when, in a\nLegal Aid case, the Clerk of Court has certified that there is no local\nrepresentation available. The person proposed to be admitted must possess\na qualification prescribed by Section 3(1) of the Law and to have come or\nintends to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing, acting or\nadvising in the specified suit or matter. The application is to be made in\nsuch manner as the Judge may think fit.\n\nThere are concerns that such limited admission has become simply a\nformality and that the Judge concerned is not usually being provided with\nthe information necessary to enable a proper exercise of discretion as the\nLaw requires. In future, such applications must be made in the following\nmanner:\n1. The application and supporting affidavits must be filed and delivered to\nthe Judge who is to hear the application not less than three (3) business\ndays before the hearing of the application. If necessary, the affidavit of\nthe person proposed to be admitted (\"the Applicant\") may, for the\npurposes of the hearing of the application, be in unsworn final draft\nform if the Applicant is not present in the Islands at the time, provided\nthat an undertaking is given to the Court at the hearing of the\napplication that the affidavit will be sworn as soon as possible after the\nApplicant's arrival in the Islands.\n2.\nThe application will not be listed to be heard less than one business day\nprior to the hearing of the specified suit or matter in which it is proposed\nthat the Applicant should appear if that is the purpose for which the\nApplicant's admission is sought.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 89\n\n3.  The application shall be supported by an affidavit sworn by the\nApplicant (\"the Applicant's Affidavit\") and also by an affidavit by the\nlocal Attorney-at-Law who, or a member of whose firm, has instructed\nthe Applicant to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing,\nacting or advising in the specified suit or matter (\"the Attorney's\nAffidavit\").\n4.  The Applicant's Affidavit shall contain and exhibit the following:\n(a)  details of the qualification(s) prescribed by Section 3(1) of the Law\nwhich the Applicant possesses and a certified copy or copies\nthereof shall be exhibited;\n(b)  confirmation that the Applicant is not or has not been the subject\nof any criminal conviction or proceedings other than in respect of\na minor traffic offence;\n(c)  confirmation that the Applicant is not or has not been the subject\nof any disciplinary or other similar proceedings relating to\nprofessional misconduct of any kind and an appropriately certified\nCertificate of Good Standing or the equivalent issued by the\nprofessional body to which the Applicant belongs shall be\nexhibited;\n(d) confirmation that the Applicant has been instructed by a Cayman\nIslands Attorney-at-Law, who shall be identified, to come to the\nIslands for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the\nspecified suit or matter, and that the Applicant has come or intends\nto come to the Islands for one or more of those purposes.\n5. The original(s) of the certified copy or copies of the Applicant's\nqualifications(s) referred to in paragraph 4(a) above and of the certified\nCertificate of Good Standing or equivalent referred to in paragraph 4(c)\nabove shall be made available to the Judge at the hearing of the\napplication.\n6. The Attorney's Affidavit shall contain and exhibit the following:\n(a)   confirmation that it is the wish of the relevant client of the deponent\nor that client\u2019s firm that the Applicant should be instructed on the\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 90\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nclient's behalf to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing,\nacting or advising in the specified suit or matter;\n(b)  confirmation that the Applicant has been instructed by the\ndeponent, or by some other named Attorney-at-Law in the\nApplicant\u2019s firm, to come to the Islands for the purpose of\nappearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or matter;\n(c)  confirmation that the Applicant has been granted the necessary\nwork permit or other immigration authorisation for the necessary\nduration to enable the Applicant to be in or come to the Islands for\nthe purpose of appearing, acting or advising in the specified suit or\nmatter and a copy of the relevant work permit or other such\nauthorisation shall be exhibited;\n(d)  unless the Judge hearing the Application is already very familiar\nwith the specified suit or matter concerned, a sufficiently detailed\nsummary thereof to enable the Judge to exercise that Judge\u2019s\ndiscretion in all the circumstances as to whether or not to admit the\nApplicant for the purpose of appearing, acting or advising in that\nspecified suit or matter;\n(e)  if the Applicant is not Leading Counsel or the equivalent but is\njunior counsel or a solicitor or the equivalent, sufficient\nexplanation as to why it is necessary and appropriate for the\nApplicant to come to the Islands for the purpose of appearing,\nacting or advising in the specified suit or matter concerned.\n7.  Subject to paragraph 8 below, the limited admission of junior counsel,\nsolicitors or the equivalent will not normally be granted except in\nunusual and special circumstances which must be fully set out in the\nAttorney's Affidavit.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 91\n\n8.  The Judge may, in that Judge\u2019s discretion in the particular\ncircumstances, themselves direct that a person qualified pursuant to\nSection 3(1) of the Law shall apply for limited admission for the\npurpose of appearing, acting or advising in a specified suit or matter.\nIn that case, with the exception of paragraphs 3, 4(a) \u2014 (c), 5, 6(c), 9\nand 10, which shall remain applicable, the Judge may dispense with\ncompliance with such other of the provisions, if any, of this Practice\nDirection as the Judge may think fit.\n9. If granted limited admission the Applicant is required to sign the\nRegister of Admitted Attorneys either at the time of the application or,\nif the application has been heard prior to the Applicant having come to\nthe Islands, as soon as practicable after the Applicant\u2019s arrival in the\nIslands and in any event before any appearance in the specified suit or\nmatter in which it is proposed the Applicant should appear.\n10.  By signing the Register of Admitted Attorneys the Applicant is deemed\nto have accepted and agreed to act in accordance and to comply with\nall of the professional duties and obligations and to be subject to the\nprofessional discipline of a generally admitted Attorney-at-Law and an\nOfficer of the Court.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\n9th February 2012\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 92\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\nPRACTICE DIRECTION ON APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTIONS\n72, 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE RLL\u201d).\nIn the recent past a number of decisions of this Court have dealt, in different\nways, with the subject of applications under the RLL, for leave of the Court\nto enforce charges under the RLL by way of sale by private treaty.\nThese Practice Directions seek to explain the practice of the Court which\nhas emerged as the result of those decisions.\nTypically, Originating Summonses seek the following kinds of relief or\nvariants thereof:\n1.  Declaratory relief to the effect that the defendant chargor (\u201cthe\nchargor\u201d) is in default of payment under the charge;\n2.  That the charge be enforced by sale of the charged property by way of\npublic auction or private treaty, by the chargee acting in good faith and\nhaving regard to the interests of the chargor.\n3.  That a reserved price be fixed for the sale by way of private treaty.\n4.  That the property be listed for sale on the CIREBA Multi-listing\nSystem (\u201cthe MLS\u201d).\n5.  That other terms and conditions of the sale be determined, if any.\n6.  That leave be granted to issue a Writ of Possession with respect to the\nproperty.\n7.  Alternatively, that the chargee be given reasonable access to the\nproperty for the purpose of viewing or for any other purpose in\nconnection with the chargee\u2019s efforts to sell the charged property\n8.  Costs.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 93\n\nWhether or not any aspect of relief is granted will of course be a matter for\nthe exercise of discretion by the Court having regard to the particular\ncircumstances of each case, including the conduct of the parties (see section\n77 of the RLL and National Building Society v Cranston 2011 (1) CILR\n67 and Bank of Butterfield (Cayman) Ltd v. Thornton and Thornton\nCause No. 307 of 2010 written decision given on 29th March 2011)\n\nWhere the chargee has a power of sale under the charge and has complied\nwith the requirements of the RLL for the giving of notice, the jurisdiction\nof the Court to exercise its discretion to vary or add to the provisions of\nsection 75 of the RLL to allow the chargee to sell by way of private treaty\n(in addition to or instead of by way of public auction) will not be in dispute.\nSection 77 provides that the parties to a charge may vary or add to the\nprovisions of section 75:\n\u201cprovided that such variation or addition shall not be acted upon\nunless the court, having regard to the proceedings and conduct of the\nparties and the circumstances of the case, so orders\u201d.\n\nFactors of importance to the exercise of the Court\u2019s discretion will include:\na.  That the property must not be sold at an undervalue (Paradise Manor\nLtd v. Bank of Nova Scotia 1984-85 CILR 437; Bank of Butterfield\n(Cayman) Ltd. v Jervis and Jackson 2011 (1) CILR 54;\nb.  That the sale has to be in good faith (Paradise Manor Ltd v. Bank of\nNova Scotia (above) and Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson\n(above);\nc.  The best evidence of market value is the reaction of the market\n(Scotiabank (Cayman Islands) Ltd. v. Rankine 2004-05 CILR Note\n26 and Bank of Butterfield v. Thornton & Thornton (above));\nd.  The standard of care required of the chargee: that of a reasonable person\nin respect of the conduct of that person\u2019s own private affairs (Paradise\nManor Ltd v. Bank of Nova Scotia  (above));\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 94\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\ne.  Leave to sell by private treaty at a reserve price set by the Court will\nnot usually be granted without previous attempts to market the property\nand to sell by public auction on the open market (Bank of Butterfield\nv. Jervis and Jackson (above);\nf.  Before leave to sell by private treaty at a reserve price set by the Court\nwill be given, there will usually be to the satisfaction of the Court,\nevidence at least of attempts to sell by way of public auction (now\ndefined to include sale by listing on the MLS at a reserve price set by\nthe chargee aimed at realising the true market value: see Scotiabank\nTrust v Ebanks and Gordon below.\ng.  However, leave to sell by private treaty may be granted where there has\nbeen no prior attempt to sell on the open market where the Court is\nsatisfied that it is in the interest of justice so to order, especially bearing\nin mind that attempts to sell by way of a formal public auction could\nadd unnecessarily to the costs to be ultimately passed on to the chargor\n(National Building Society of Cayman v. Cranston (above)). Where\nsuch leave is granted to sell by private treaty (that is: without a reserved\nprice being set), the order will usually be conditioned as being subject\nto the chargee \u201cacting in good faith and having regard to the interests\nof the chargor\u201d.\nh.  \u201cSale by public auction\u201d does not necessarily require a formal auction\nwith a bidding process conducted by an appointed auctioneer but \u201cin\nsubstance, the sale of a property through the MLS is a public auction\u201d\n(Scotiabank & Trust (Cayman) Ltd. v. Cecilia Ebanks (as\nadministratrix of estate of Allan Ebanks) and Rudolph Gordon (as\nadministrator of estate of Allan Ebanks) GC Cause No. 298 of 2010,\nJudgment delivered January 12th 2012\ni.  The sanction of the Court of a price obtained whether by public auction\n(by listing on the MLS or otherwise) or by private treaty, is more likely\nto be granted where the original asking price had been set by the\nchargee by reference to an independent valuation. In this way the Court\nwill be able more likely to conclude that the chargee has acted in good\nfaith in exercise of its rights under the charge.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 95\n\nj.  There is no need for an application to the Court for placement of the\nproperty for sale by public auction (whether by way of a listing on the\nMLS or by formal auction) in the first instance by the chargee who, by\nvirtue of the powers given under the charge and section 75 of the RLL,\ncan sell by way of public auction without the leave of the Court (Bank\nof Butterfield v. Jervis and Jackson (above)).\nk.  An application to the Court is necessitated only where leave to sell by\nprivate treaty (whether by fixing of a reserve price or otherwise) is\nrequired by way of a variation of section 75 of the RLL as agreed in the\ncharge loan agreement.\nl.  Where the Court considers that a chargee has brought an unnecessary\napplication for leave to sell by public auction, the Court will refuse to\ngrant an order for the costs of so doing Bank of Butterfield v. Jervis\nand Jackson (above)).\n\nOther factors which the Court will consider will include:\n(i) the defendant(s)\u2019 position and whether they have notice of the\napplication;\n(ii)  whether the defendants are represented and have a proper\nunderstanding of the application;\n(ii)  whether there is any element of unfairness or unreasonableness in the\nchargee\u2019s application;\n(iv) whether an order for costs should be imposed upon the chargor, over\nand above any right that the chargee might have to recover costs under\nthe charge loan agreement.\n\n Hon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\n22nd May 2012\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 96\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nLISTING OF FAMILY LAW PROCEEDINGS\n\n1. Application and Commencement\n1.1 This practice direction applies to \u201cfamily law proceedings\u201d defined as\nincluding any of the following \u2013\na.  applications under Section 20, Section 21 Matrimonial Causes Act\n(as amended and revised);\nb.  application is governed by rule 16 Matrimonial Causes Rules(as\namended and revised);\nc.  applications under Section 6 of the Children Act (as amended and\nrevised);\nd.  applications concerning affiliation orders;\ne.\n applications under the Protection from Domestic Violence Act (as\namended and revised)\nf.\n applications under the Children Act  (as amended and revised)\n\n1.2 This Practice Direction shall come into force on, 8th October, 2012.\n\n2. Introduction\n2.1 Applications brought for orders within family law proceedings\nshould come before the Court in a timely manner. The purpose of\nthis practice direction is to ensure that all applications made within\nfamily law proceedings will be allocated a first mention date\nwithin 28 days of filing. Emergency applications may nonetheless\nbe brought before a judge on a more urgent basis.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 97\n\n2.2 The Listing Office will allocate at least two days each month as\nfamily law proceedings mention days. The maximum hearing time\nthat may be given for any case listed on a mention day will be 30\nminutes. New applications will be allocated a first appointment\nhearing for a specific time. The applicant must ensure that the\napplication and affidavit are in the appropriate form and that there\nis prompt service of the same. The parties must be punctual in their\nattendance for all appointments and a party shall attend all\nappointments of which that party has been given notice, unless the\nCourt otherwise directs.\n\n3. New Practice\n3.1  The applicant shall file the application in the appropriate form\nalong with supporting affidavit(s). There should be sufficient\ncopies for them to be served on each respondent.\n\n3.2 The applicant shall serve a copy of the application (endorsed with\nthe date, time and place of the hearing) and supporting affidavit(s)\non each respondent, such minimum number of days prior to the\ndate fixed as may be specified in Rules of Court.\n\n3.3  On receipt of the documents filed the Listing Office in conjunction\nwith the Court Registry shall:\n(i)\nfix the date, time and place for a first appointment,\nallowing sufficient time for the applicant to comply with\nparagraph 3.2. The allocated first appointment should be\nwithin 28 days of the date of the issuing of the application;\n(ii)\nendorse the date, time and place so fixed upon the copies\nof the application filed by the applicant; and\n(iii)      return the copies to the applicant forthwith\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 98\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.4  An application for an urgent or ex parte hearing may, with leave\nof the Court, be made in which case the applicant shall, upon\nmaking the application, file with the Court Registry the application\nin the appropriate form along with supporting affidavit (which\nshould set out the reasons why an urgent or ex parte hearing is\nnecessary).\n\n3.5 Where the Court refuses to make an order on an ex parte\napplication, it may direct that the application be made inter partes.\n\nDATED this 8th day of July 2012\n\nThe Hon Anthony Smellie QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 99\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 100\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012\n(GCR O.1, r. 12)\nPAYMENT SCHEDULES - AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES\n (GCR O.92, r. 9)\n1. This practice direction shall come into force on 1 December 2012.\nWith effect from 1 December 2012 practice Direction No. 4 of 1995\nis hereby revoked.\n2. The following officers are authorised to sign Payment Schedules:\n'A' Signatories -\nThe Chief Justice\nPuisne Judges (including acting Judges)\nMagistrates (including acting Magistrates)\nCourt Administrator\n'B' Signatories\nThe Clerk of the Court\nThe Registrar of the Court of Appeal\nDeputy Clerks of the Court\n3. Payment Schedule requiring payment of-\n(a)  less than CI$ 10,000, US$12,000 or the equivalent in any other\ncurrency shall be signed by any 'A' or 'B' signatory;\n(b)  more than CI$ 10,000, US$ 12,000 or the equivalent in any other\ncurrency but less than CI$ 100,000, US$120,000 or the equivalent\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTIONS NO. 7 OF 2012\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 101\n\nin any other currency, shall be signed by an 'A' signatory or any\ntwo 'B' signatories; and\n(c)  more than CI$ 100,000, US$ 120,000 or the equivalent in any other\ncurrency, shall be signed by an 'A' signatory\nDated this 19th day of October 2012\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 102\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nCONSENT ORDERS IN ANCILLARY RELIEF PROCEEDINGS\nPractitioners are reminded that when the Court is asked to make an order by\nconsent, embodying the terms of an agreed settlement of ancillary relief\nproceedings, the Court is still obliged to comply with the statutory duty\nimposed by Section 19 of the Matrimonial Causes Act (as amended and\nrevised).\n1. In this regard, the Court will now require the following before exercising\nits powers under section 19:\n(i) Confirmation signed by both parties that they have made and\nreceived sufficient disclosure to enable them to make an informed\ndecision to ask the Court to approve the terms contained within the\nproposed consent order.\n\n(ii) In the case of unrepresented parties, signed confirmation that they\nhave been advised to seek legal advice in regard to the proposed\nsettlement, and have either done so or have declined to do so.\n\n(iii) The lodging of a fully completed Statement of information for a\nconsent order. (Where all of the parties attend the hearing of an\napplication for financial relief or where the court is satisfied by the\ncontent of evidence already filed, the court may dispense with the\nlodging of a Statement of information and give directions for the\ninformation which would otherwise be required to be given in such\na statement to be given in such manner as it sees fit).\n\nThis Practice Direction shall come into force on the 1st day of May 2013.\nDATED this 9th day of April 2013\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 103\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 104\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 105\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 106\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n(GCRO.1, R.12)\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE\nCOMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES\nPROCEEDINGS\n\n1. Appointment of Registrar of the FSD\n1.1 Ms. Tomica Daley has been appointed Registrar of the FSD, pursuant\nto Rule 2(1) of the Grand Court (Amendment) Rules 2009 with effect\nfrom 6th May 2013.\n\n1.2 All communications with the Registrar should be \u2014\n(a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor (Room#l0l), Kirk\nHouse; or\n(b) by e-mail addressed to Tomica.Daley@judicial.ky; or\n(c) by telephone 244 3808\n\n2. Assignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD\n2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting in conjunction with the\nChief Justice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined\nin OCR 0.72, r.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the\nproceeding is commenced.\n\n2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner\/plaintiff\u2019s attorney to provide the\nRegistrar with any and all information which appears to that attorney\nto be relevant in determining which judge should be assigned to the\nmatter. For example \u2014\n(a) If the plaintiff\u2019s attorney considers that it would be appropriate for\ntwo or more related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 107\n\nfact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter\ndelivered with the originating process; or\n(b) If the plaintiffs attorney considers that it would be inappropriate\nfor a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever\nreason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar\nin a letter delivered with the originating process.\n\n2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will \u2014\n(a) notify the parties' attorneys; and\n(b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge.\n\n2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned\njudge on the next business following the day on which the originating\nprocess is filed at the FSD Registry.\n\n2.5 The docket of the financial services proceedings assigned to each Judge\nof the FSD will be updated by the judge's secretary and circulated\nweekly to the Chief Justice, the Registrar and the Listing Officer.\n\n2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.5, r. 1(7) requires that the initials\nof the assigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part\nof the cause number. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must\nbe included as part of the cause number as it appears in all pleadings,\naffidavits and orders.\n\n3. Procedure for listing hearings\n3.1 Ms. Yasmin Ebanks will continue to serve as Listing Officer of the FSD\nbut effective immediately she will make Listings in consultation with\nthe Registrar of theFSD.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 108\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.2 All communications with the FSD Registry should be \u2014\n(a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor (Room#l05), Kirk\nHouse; or\n(b) by e-mail addressed to Tomica.Daley@judicial.ky\n(c) listing for FSD cases will be primarily managed by the FSD\nRegistrar in liaison with the Listing Officer. All requests for FSD\nlistings\nmust\nbe\nmade\nby\nemail\naddressed\nto\nTomica.Daley@judicial.ky\n\n3.3 For the purpose of this Practice Direction the expression \"hearing\" shall\ninclude summonses for directions, case management conferences\n(\"CMCs\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference\ncalls), interlocutory applications and trials.\n\n3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has\nbeen assigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to\nreview the Court file.\n\n3.5 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to FSD.\n\n3.6 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the\navailability of judges, the Registrar of the FSD and Listing Officer are\nnot authorised to fix any hearing date without the prior approval of the\nassigned judge. If the assigned judge is not already familiar with the\nissues or cannot readily ascertain the issues relevant to the proposed\nhearing by reviewing the Court file, the parties may be required to\nproduce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72,\nr.4(3).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 109\n\n3.7 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned\njudge in consultation with the Registrar and Listing Officer, will\nnormally fix the hearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions\nor at a CMC in which all parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel)\nwill be required to participate.\n\n3.8 The Registrar will publish a monthly list (on the 1st of each month) of\nhearings scheduled in the FSD for the ensuing month.\n\n4. Listing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions\n4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for\nreducing the share capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies\nAct) the petitioner's attorney is required (pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6)\nto issue a summons for directions at the same time as presenting the\npetition.\n\n4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the\nproposed order for directions including the timetable for the company\nmeeting(s) and court hearing(s), together with a covering letter which\nexplains whether and, if so, why the matter is particularly time\nsensitive.\n\n4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the\nassigned Judge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be\ndispensed with under s.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional\ncase where settlement of a list of creditors is required under s.15(2),\nand the materials filed do not disclose any other reason for the assigned\njudge to require additional evidence or submissions, then the Judge\nmay make an order for directions without the need for a hearing. In all\nother cases the Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing in\nchambers.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 110\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5. Listing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders\nunder s.124\n5.1  Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of\nthe Companies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made\nwithout the need for  any  hearing  (pursuant to CWR O.15, r.5(1).)\n\n5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which\nfurther evidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may\nconvene a CMC or direct the Listing Officer to fix a date for hearing\nthe petition in open court.\n\n6. Applications for an order that a company be restored to the\nRegister\n6.1 With effect from Monday 27th September 2010 applications made  by\na company  or one of its members, which are governed by GCR O.102,\nr.17, will be determined by the Registrar of the FSD rather than the\nClerk of the Court  and Form Nos. 66 and 67 should  be amended\naccordingly.\n\n6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17 (6) (c), that an\napplication ought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the\nRegistrar will \u2014\n(a) assign the application to a judge of the FSD;\n(b) fix a hearing date; and\n(c) give notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail.\n\n6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102,\nr.18, will continue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 111\n\n6.4 At the same time as assigning a creditor's application to a judge of the\nFSD, the Registrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to\nadvertise the petition and give other creditors an opportunity to be\nheard, the hearing will be fixed on a date not less than 21 days or more\nthan 28 days after the date on which the petition is presented.\n\n7. Applications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred\n7.1 An application by an official liquidator or officeholder for a direction,\npursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and\nrevised), that payment of court fees be deferred must be made to the\nassigned judge.\n\n7.2 Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the assigned\njudge (with a copy to the Registrar) and signed by the officeholder\npersonally.\n\n7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned Judge and that\nJudge\u2019s decision will be communicated to the applicant and the\nRegistrar by the judge's secretary.\n\n7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the officeholder shall have\nthe right to ask the Judge to reconsider that Judge\u2019s decision, for which\npurpose the applicant may ask the judge's secretary to fix an\nappointment for the applicant to appear before the Judge in person.\n\n7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) is to ensure that an officeholder who is\nrequired or entitled to make an application to the Court in the\nperformance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will\nbe payable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not\nbe deterred from performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in\nthe position of having to pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s\nown pocket.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 112\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an official liquidator has\nunder that official liquidator\u2019s control \"sufficient money with which to\npay the fees immediately\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge\nwill have regard to the general rules as to priority contained in CWR\nOrder 20, the effect of which is that court fees rank ahead of an official\nliquidator's remuneration.\n\n7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under\nthat officeholder\u2019s control, that officeholder\u2019s application letter must\nstate (a) the amount which is immediately available; (b) the amount\nwhich is likely to become available to that officeholder within the next\n90 days; (c) the purposes for which the officeholder intends to spend\nsuch cash over the next 90 days; and (d) whether the officeholder has\nreceived any remuneration or holds funds in trust for that purpose.\n\n8. Applications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as\n\"consolidated\" for the purposes of assessing court fees\n8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff for a direction that two or more\nseparate proceedings governed by the Companies Winding Up Rules\nor GCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of\ncalculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable\npursuant to Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and\nrevised) must be made to the Registrar.\n\n8.2  Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the Registrar\nat the time of filing the originating process.\n\n8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the\nprovisions of paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shall apply.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 113\n\n9. Case Management Conferences\n9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of 0.72, r.4 (2), the assigned\nJudge may convene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit.\n\n9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if\nforeign lawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the\nparties or the assigned judge is likely to be off the Island.\n\n9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a telephone conference call, the\nRegistrar will direct one of the parties to set up the call and circulate\nthe dial-in instructions and codes to the judge and all the parties.\n\n9.4 The etiquette for telephonic CMCs requires that all participating\nattorneys must be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge\nwill be the last person to join the conference, whereupon the Judge will\nask all the participants to identify themselves.\n\n9.5 Telephonic CMC's may not be tape recorded without the consent of the\nJudge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be tape recorded,\nthe Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the\njudge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not tape\nrecorded, the note taken or approved by the judge will constitute the\nofficial record.\n\n9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the assigned judge during the course of\na CMC and, in appropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the\nprincipal purpose of fixing the date for the trial or further hearings.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 114\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD\n10.1 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear\nsummonses for directions and interlocutory applications by means of\ntelephone or video conferences when they are off the Island.\n\n10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes\nplace by telephone or video conference.\n\n11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 27th day of\nSeptember 2013. With effect from 27th September 2013 Practice\nDirection No. 1 of 2010 is hereby revoked.\n\nSeptember 26, 2013\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 115\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013\n(Orders 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 19 and 25 Companies Winding Up Rules (as\namended and revised)\nPROCEDURE FOR HEARING OF WINDING UP PETITIONS\n\nWith effect from Friday 1st March 2013, the Companies Winding Up\n(Amendment) Rules 2013 amended Orders 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 19 and 25 of the\nCompanies Winding Up Rules 2008 and varied the procedure for filing of\nCreditors\u2019 Petitions, Contributory Petitions and Authority's Petitions.\nIn order to ensure that winding up petitions and summonses for directions\nrelating to winding up petitions are served with hearing dates on the same\nday that they are filed, the following procedure now governs the\nadministrative process \u2014\n1. Winding up petitions must not be filed until after the case has been\nassigned to a Judge and a hearing date has been fixed.\n\n2. Attorneys are required to deliver the winding up petition (and\nsupporting affidavits) to the Registrar of the Financial Services\nDivision together with a covering letter asking for the case to be\nassigned to a Judge and for a hearing date to be fixed. Any winding up\npetitions presented to the Civil Registry must be delivered to the\nRegistrar of the Financial Services Division without being stamped and\nfiled.\n\n3. The Chief Justice will assign the matter to a Judge and return the file to\nthe Registrar of the Financial Services Division.\n\n4. A hearing date would normally be assigned within 24 hours after the\nChief Justice assigns the matter to a Judge.\n\n5. As soon as the hearing date has been fixed:-\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 116\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(a) the assigned Judge's secretary should notify the Petitioner's\nattorneys of the hearing date, and request payment of fees;\n(b) The assigned Judge's secretary should stamp and file the petition\nand return it to the Petitioner's attorney;\n(c) the assigned Judge's secretary should notify the Petitioner's\nattorneys that the filed documents are ready for collection and\npayment of fees;\n(d) the fees should then be paid; and\n(e) the petition and supporting affidavits must be served forthwith.\n\nBecause the FSD cause number is generated by the Cash Office upon\npayment of the filing fee, it follows that cheques should not be accepted\nin respect of winding up petitions until after all the steps outlined above\nhave been completed.\n\n6.\nThis Practice Direction shall come into force on the 27th September\n2013.\n\nSeptember 26, 2013\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 117\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n(GCR O. 1, r. 12)\nJUDICIAL REVIEW \u2014 PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL\nREVIEW\n(GCR O. 53)\n\nIntroduction\nThis protocol applies to all proceedings for judicial review in the Cayman\nIslands.  It does not affect the time limit specified by GCR O. 53, r. 4 which\nrequires that any application for judicial review must be filed promptly and\nin any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first\narose.2\n\n1\nJudicial review allows people with a sufficient interest in a\ndecision or action by a public body to ask a judge to review the\nlawfulness of:\n\n1.1 rules, and regulations, or other subordinate legislation; or\n\n1.2 a decision, action or failure to act in relation to the exercise of a\npublic function.\n\n2\nJudicial review may be used where there is no right of appeal or where\nall avenues of appeal have been exhausted.\n\n3\nAlternative Dispute Resolution (\"ADR\")\n\n2 Save where any statutory provision has the effect of limiting the time within which an application for judicial\nreview may be made; see GC R 0. 53, r. 4(3). Although the Court does have the discretion under GCR O.  53, r.\n4 to allow  a  late application, the Court will only permit this in exceptional circumstances.  Compliance  with\nthis  Protocol  alone  is  unlikely  to  be  sufficient  to persuade the Court to allow a late application.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 118\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.1 The parties should consider whether some form of alternative\ndispute resolution procedure would be more suitable than\nlitigation, and if so, endeavour to agree which form to adopt. Both\nthe applicant and defendant may be required by the Court to\nprovide evidence that alternative means of resolving their dispute\nwere considered. The Court takes the view that litigation should be\na last resort, and that proceedings should not be issued prematurely\nwhen a settlement is still actively being explored. Parties are\nwarned that if the protocol is not followed (including this\nparagraph) then the Court may have regard to such conduct when\ndetermining costs. However, parties should also note that an\napplication for judicial review \"shall be made promptly and in any\nevent within 3 months from the date when grounds for the\napplication first arose\".\n\n 3.2 It is not practicable in this protocol to address in detail how the\nparties might decide which method to adopt to resolve their\nparticular dispute. However, summarised below are some of the\noptions for resolving disputes without recourse to litigation:\n(a) discussion and negotiation;\n(b) early neutral evaluation by an independent third party (for\nexample, an attorney experienced in the field of administrative\nlaw or an individual experienced in the subject matter of the\nclaim);\n(c) mediation - a form of facilitated negotiation assisted by an\nindependent neutral party.\n\n3.3 It is expressly recognised that no party can or should be forced\nto mediate or enter into any form of ADR.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 119\n\n4\nJudicial review may not be appropriate in every instance.\nApplicants are strongly advised to seek appropriate legal advice\nwhen considering such proceedings and, in particular, before\nadopting this Protocol or issuing an application.\n\n5\nThis Protocol sets out a code of good practice and contains the steps\nwhich parties should generally follow before making an application for\njudicial review.\n\n6\nThis Protocol does not impose a greater obligation on a public body to\ndisclose documents or give reasons for its decision than that already\nprovided for in statute or common law. However, where the Court\nconsiders that a public body should have provided relevant documents\nand\/or information, particularly where this failure is a breach of a\nstatutory or common law requirement, it may impose sanctions. This\nProtocol will not be appropriate where the defendant does not have the\nlegal power to change the decision being challenged. This Protocol will\nnot be appropriate in urgent cases; for example, when directions have\nbeen set, or are in force, for the applicant's rem oval from the Cayman\nIslands, or where there is an urgent need for an interim order to compel\na public body to act where it has unlawfully refused to do so; in such\ncases an application for judicial review should be made immediately.\nAn applicant's letter before action will not stop the implementation of\na disputed decision in all instances.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 120\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n 7\nAll applicants will need to satisfy themselves whether they should\nfollow this Protocol, depending upon the circumstances of that\napplicant\u2019s case. Where the use of this Protocol is appropriate, the\nCourt will normally expect all parties to have complied with it and will\ntake into account compliance or non-compliance with the Protocol\nwhen giving direct ions for case management of proceedings or when\nmaking orders for costs. However, even in emergency cases, it is good\npractice to send a fax to the defendant a draft of the application for\njudicial review which the applicant intends to issue. An applicant is\nalso normally required to notify a defendant when an interim\nmandatory order is being sought.\n\nThe applicant's letter before action\n8\nBefore making a claim, the applicant should send a letter to the\ndefendant. The purpose of this letter is to identify the issues in dispute\nand to establish whether litigation can be avoided.\n\n9\nApplicants should normally use the suggested standard format for the\nletter outlined at Annex A.\n\n10 The letter should contain the date and details of the decision, act or\nomission being challenged and a clear summary of the facts on which\nthe application is based. It should also contain the details of any\nrelevant information that the applicant is seeking and an explanation of\nwhy this is considered relevant.\n\n11 The letter should normally contain the details of any interested parties\nknown to the applicant. Those interested parties should be sent a copy\nof the letter before action for their information. Applicants are strongly\nadvised to seek appropriate legal advice when considering such\nproceedings and, in particular, before sending the letter before action\nto other interested parties or issuing an application.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 121\n\n12 An application should not normally be issued until the proposed date\nfor reply given in the letter before action has expired, unless the\ncircumstances of the case require more immediate action to be taken.\n\nThe defendant's letter of response\n13 Defendants should normally respond within 14 days of the letter before\naction using the standard format at Annex B. Failure to do so will be\ntaken into account by the Court and sanctions may be imposed on the\ndefendant unless there are good reasons not to do so.\n\n14 Where it is not possible within the proposed time limit to reply\nsubstantively to the letter before action the defendant should send an\ninterim reply and propose a reasonable extension within which to reply\nsubstantively to the letter before action.  Where a defendant seeks an\nextension, it should give reasons and, where required, the additional\ninformation requested by the applicant in the letter before action.\nProposing such an extension will not affect the time limit for the\napplicant to issue an application for judicial review nor will it bind the\napplicant where (s)he considers the proposal to be unreasonable.\nHowever, where the Court considers that a subsequent application for\njudicial review has been made prematurely it may impose sanctions.\n\n15 If the defendant concedes the claim in full, its reply should say so in\nclear and unambiguous terms.\n\n16 If the defendant concedes the claim in part or does not concede the\nclaim at all, its reply should say so in clear and unambiguous terms,\nand:\n16.1 where appropriate, contain a new decision, clearly identifying\nwhat aspects of the claim are being conceded and what are not, or,\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 122\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\ngive a clear timescale within which the new decision will be\nissued;\n16.2 provide a fuller explanation for the decision, if it considers it\nappropriate to do so;\n16.3 address any points of dispute, or explain why they cannot be\naddressed;\n16.4 enclose any relevant documentation requested by the applicant, or\nexplain why the documents are not being enclosed; and\n16.5 where appropriate, confirm whether or not it will oppose any\napplication for an interim remedy.\n\n17 The response should be sent to all interested parties identified by the\napplicant and contain details of any other parties whom the defendant\nconsiders also have an interest.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 123\n\nANNEX A\n\nLETTER BEFORE ACTION\n\nSECTION 1 - INFORMATION REQUIRED IN A LETTER BEFORE\nACTION\n\nProposed claim for judicial review\n1. To\n\n(Insert the name and address (including post-office box number) of the\nproposed defendant - see details in section 2.)\n\n2. The applicant\n\n(Insert the title, first and last name and the address (including postoffice box number) of you, the applicant.)\n\n3. Reference details\n\n(When dealing with large organisations it is important to understand\nthat the information relating to any particular individual's previous\ndealings with it may not be immediately available. Therefore it is\nimportant to set out any relevant reference numbers for the matter in\ndispute and\/or the identity of those within the public body who have\nbeen handling the particular matter in dispute.)\n\n4. The details of the matter being challenged\n\n(Set out clearly the matter being challenged, particularly if there has\nbeen more than one decision.)\n\n5. The issue\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 124\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(Set out the date and details of the decision, or act or omission being\nchallenged, a brief summary of the facts and why it is contended to be\nwrong. Consider attaching a draft of the Originating Summons.)\n\n6.\nThe details of the action that the defendant is expected to take\n\n(Set out the details of the remedy you seek, including whether you are\nrequesting a review or any interim remedy.)\n\n7.\nThe details of your attorneys, if any, dealing with this application\n\n(Set out the name, address (including post-office box number), fax\nnumber and, if known, email address, and reference details of any\nattorneys dealing with the application on your behalf.)\n\n8.\nThe details of any interested parties\n\n(Set out the details of any interested parties and confirm that they have\nbeen sent a copy of this letter.)\n\n9.\nThe details of any information sought\n\n(Set out the details of any information that you seek. This may include\na request for a fuller explanation of the reasons for the decision that is\nbeing challenged.)\n\nl 0. The details of any documents that are considered relevant and necessary\n\n(Set out the details of any documentation or policy in respect of which\nyou seek disclosure and explain why these are relevant. If you rely on\na statutory duty to disclose, you should specify that duty.)\n\n11. The address for reply and service of court documents\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 125\n\n(Insert the address (including post-office box number) to which the\ndefendant should reply, including, where relevant, a fax number and\/or\nemail address.)\n\n12. Proposed reply date\n(The precise time will depend upon the circumstances of each\nindividual case. Although a shorter or longer time may be appropriate\nin a particular case, in most circumstances it is reasonable to allow 14\ndays.)\n\nSECTION 2 - ADDRESS FOR SENDING THE LETTER BEFORE\nACTION\n\nLetters before action sent to statutory authorities should be addressed to the\nrelevant Chief Executive Officer, Managing Director, or Director as the\ncase may be. Letters before action to statutory tribunals should be addressed\nto the Chairperson of the Tribunal.\n\nAll letters before action should be copied to the Hon. Attorney General,\nGovernment Administration Building, 133 Elgin Avenue, George Town,\nP.O. Box 907, Grand Cayman KYl-1103, Cayman Islands.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 126\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nANNEX B\n\nRESPONSE TO A LETTER BEFORE ACTION\n\nINFORMATION REQUIRED IN A RESPONSE TO A LETTER\nBEFORE ACTION\n\nProposed claim for Judicial Review\n1.\nApplicant\n\n(Insert the title, first and last names and the address (including postoffice box number) to which any reply should be sent. If responding to\nan attorney, the letter should also be sent by fax and\/or email if the\nattorney's details are available.)\n\n2.\nFrom\n\n(Insert the name and address of the defendant.)\n\n3.\nReference details\n\n(Set out the relevant reference numbers for the matter in dispute and\nthe identity of those within the public body who have been handling the\nissue.)\n\n4.\nThe details of the matter being challenged\n\n(Set out details of the matter being challenged, providing a fuller\nexplanation of the decision, where this is considered appropriate.)\n\n5.\nResponse to the proposed application\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2013\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 127\n\n(Set out whether the defendant concedes the issue in question in part,\nor in full, or will contest it. Where the defendant does not propose to\ndisclose any information that the applicant has requested, the\ndefendant should explain the reason for this. Where the defendant is\nsending an interim reply and there is a realistic prospect of settlement,\nit should include details.)\n\n6. Details of any other interested parties\n\n(Identify any other parties whom the defendant considers to have an\ninterest in the issue to the extent that the applicant has not already\nconfirmed that (s)he has sent to them a copy of the letter before action,\nand confirm that they have been sent a copy of this response letter and\nof the letter before action.)\n\n7. Address for further correspondence and service of court documents\n\n(Set out the address (including post-office box number and fax number\nand\/or email address) for any future correspondence on this matter,\nand an address (including post-office box number for service of any\ncourt documents.)\n\n   December 12, 2013\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 128\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\nPRACTICE GUIDANCE\n\nUse of portable cameras, recording and electronic devices, including\ncellular phones and laptop computers, in and from court buildings,\ncourtrooms and judges\u2019 chambers\n\nThe prevalent use of recorders, cellular phones, laptops and other devices,\nwhether electronic or otherwise, and live text-based forms of\ncommunication (including texts and \u201cTwitter\u201d) in court buildings and in\nparticular in and from courtrooms and chambers has made it necessary to\nprovide directions on their usage by attorneys and counsel and their\nassistants and employees attending court or chambers. Separate guidance is\nissued for the press and the general public (see paras 1 to 16 in Practice\nGuidance below).\n\n1. The following definitions shall apply:\n(a)  \u201ccourt\u201d means any courtroom or equivalent, including judge\u2019s\nchambers, or any other place in which judicial business is being\ncarried out whatever type of matter is being or will be heard\ntherein;\n(b)  \u201ccourt building\u201d means any building in which a court is located,\nwhether permanently or temporarily;\n(c)  \u201celectronic device\u201d means, for these purposes:\n(i)  any type of portable phone or computer or any other device\nthat is capable of receiving, transmitting, making, saving or\nrecording messages or transcripts, whether verbal or written,\nimages, sounds, data or other information by electronic or any\nother means;\n(ii)  any camera, whether a separate instrument or integrated\nwithin some other device and regardless of whether it operates\nelectronically, mechanically or otherwise and whether it\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 129\n\nrecords still or moving images by using digital technology,\nfilm, or any other means;\n(iii) any recording device regardless of whether it operates\nelectronically, mechanically or otherwise and whether it uses\ndigital technology, tape or any other means.\n(d)  \u201cJudge\u201d includes, for this purpose, a Magistrate and a Justice of\nthe Peace.\n2.  Possession and use of electronic devices:\n(a)  Generally: Subject to inspection by court security personnel and\nthe restrictions in this Practice Direction, an electronic device,\nother than a separate camera, may be brought into a court building\nand used other than in a court in session for the purpose of making\nand receiving phone calls and electronic messages by e-mail, text,\nTwitter or otherwise for any lawful purpose not otherwise\nprohibited provided that no electronic device may be used to take\nphotographs or in any manner whatsoever that interferes with\nproceedings in any court or with the work of any court or Judicial\nAdministration staff or other official personnel in any way.\nWithout prejudice to this generality, verbal use of any electronic\ndevice may not take place near the workstation or place of work of\nany member of such staff or personnel or near the door to any court\nin session.\n(b)  Court\n(i)  All electronic devices shall be turned off before entering a\ncourt in session and, subject to (ii) below, shall remain turned\noff while inside the court and no electronic device shall be\nused while in the court.\n(ii)  A presiding Judge will, in that Judge\u2019s discretion in the\nparticular circumstances, usually allow the attorneys and\ncounsel appearing in the hearing in the court (and their\nassistants and employees) to make reasonable and lawful use\nof electronic devices in the court in connection with the\nhearing concerned, provided that such use is not verbal, that\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 130\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthe electronic device is in \u201csilent\u201d mode or similar mode and\nthat such use does not interfere in any way with the\nproceedings or inconvenience the Judge or anyone else\npresent.\n(iii) Under the direction of the Judge, electronic communication\nlinking an on-site electronic device to an off-premises\nreceiving device or network may be specifically permitted for\nthe purpose of assisting the Court in its duties consistent with\nthe provisions of the Practice Direction and Guidance.\n(c)  Security or privacy in a particular case: If, in the discretion of the\npresiding Judge the circumstances of a particular case or hearing\nraise security or privacy issues that the Judge considers justify a\nrestriction on the use of electronic devices or any of them, the\nJudge may make a direction or order limiting or prohibiting such\nuse in the court or in any other area of the court building designated\nby the Judge for the purpose. Such direction or order may provide\nfor the collection by a marshal or court security official of all\nelectronic devices in the possession of those present in the court or\nother designated area of the court building and their return when\nthe persons who were in possession of such electronic devices\nleave the court or other designated area.\n(d)  Breach of Practice Direction\n(i)  A marshal or court security official, whether on the order or\ndirection of a Judge or otherwise, may confiscate and retain\nany electronic device that is used in breach of this Practice\nDirection or of any order or direction of a Judge. Confiscation\nor retention shall operate subject to the direction or order of\nthe court.\n(ii)  A Judge may direct the person in possession of any electronic\ndevice to delete any images or recordings made which are\nprohibited under this Practice Direction.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 131\n\n(iii)  A marshal or court security official, on the order or direction\nof a Judge, may delete any images or recordings made which\nare prohibited under this Practice Direction\n(iv)  A person who willfully or persistently breaches this Practice\nDirection or any direction or order by a Judge in relation to\nany electronic device may be found in contempt of Court.\n\nDated the 6th day of January 2014\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 132\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nPRACTICE GUIDANCE\n\n1.  This Practice Guidance (the Guidance) applies to court proceedings\nwhich are open to the public and to those parts of the proceedings which\nare not subject to reporting restrictions. It is issued (as guidance and\nnot a Practice Direction) following a consultation relating to the use of\nlive, text-based communications. Those consulted included the\njudiciary, the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions,\nthe Bar, the Law Society, and Editors in addition to interested members\nof the public via the Judicial website.\n\n2.  The Guidance clarifies the use which may be made of live text-based\ncommunications, such as mobile email, social media (including\nTwitter) and internet enabled laptops in and from courts in the Cayman\nIslands. For the purposes of this Guidance these means of\ncommunication are referred to, compendiously, as live, text-based\ncommunications.\n\n3. The Guidance is consistent with the general practice of the Courts to\nprohibit the taking of photographs in court and the use of sound\nrecording equipment in court unless the leave of the judge has first been\nobtained. In addition, there is the general requirement that nothing\nshould be published which is likely to prejudice a fair trial.\n\nGeneral principles\n4.  The Judge or Magistrate has an overriding responsibility to ensure that\nproceedings are conducted consistently with the proper administration\nof justice, and to avoid any improper interference with its processes.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 133\n\n5.  A fundamental aspect of the proper administration of justice is the\nprinciple of open justice. Fair and accurate reporting of court\nproceedings forms part of that principle. The principle is however\nsubject to well-known exceptions. Two such exceptions are the\nprohibitions, set out in paragraph 3, on photography in court and on\nmaking sound recordings of court proceedings.\n\n6.  The prohibition on photography in court, by any means, is absolute in\nthe context of court hearings and in relation to those within the\nprecincts of the court. Any equipment which has photographic\ncapability must not have that function activated.\n\n7. Sound recordings are also prohibited unless, in the exercise of its\ndiscretion, the court permits such equipment to be used. Some of the\nfactors relevant to the exercise of that discretion are:\n(a)  the existence of any reasonable need on the part of the applicant\nfor leave, whether a litigant or a person connected with the press\nor broadcasting, for the recording to be made;\n(b)  the risk that the recording could be used for the purpose of briefing\nwitnesses out of court;\n(c)  any possibility that the use of the recorder would disturb the\nproceedings or distract or worry any witnesses or other\nparticipants.\n\nUse of live, text-based communications: general considerations\n8.  The normal, indeed almost invariable, rule has been that cellular phones\nmust be turned off in court. There is however no statutory prohibition\non the use of live, text-based communications in open court.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 134\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n9.  Where a member of the public, who is in court, wishes to use live textbased communications during court proceedings an application for\npermission to activate and use, in silent mode, a cellular phone, small\nlaptop or similar piece of equipment, solely in order to make live, textbased communications of the proceedings, will need to be made. The\napplication may be made by sending a written request to the judge\nthrough court staff.\n\n10.  It is presumed that a representative of the media or a legal commentator\nusing live, text-based communications from court does not pose a\ndanger of interference to the proper administration of justice in the\nindividual case. This is because the most obvious purpose of permitting\nthe use of live, text-based communications would be to enable the\nmedia to produce fair and accurate reports of the proceedings. As such,\na representative of the media or a legal commentator who wishes to use\nlive, text-based communications from court may do so without making\nan application to the court. To ensure the proper application of this\ndirection, it will be necessary to maintain a register of accredited media\nrepresentatives similar to that maintained by the Cayman Islands\nParliament.\n\n11.  When considering, either generally or on its own motion, or following\nan application by a member of the public, whether to permit live, textbased communications, and if so by whom, the paramount question for\nthe Judge will be whether the application may interfere with the proper\nadministration of justice.\n\n12. In considering the question of permission, the factors identified in\nrelation to sound recordings above are likely to be relevant (paragraph\n7 above).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 135\n\n13.  Without being exhaustive, the danger to the administration of justice is\nlikely to be at its most acute in the context of criminal trials, e.g. where\nwitnesses who are out of court may be informed of what has already\nhappened in court and so coached or briefed before they then give\nevidence, or where information posted on, for instance, Twitter about\ninadmissible evidence may influence members of a jury. However, the\ndanger is not confined to criminal proceedings; in civil, and sometimes\nfamily proceedings, simultaneous reporting from the courtroom may\ncreate pressure on witnesses, distracting or worrying them.\n\n14.  It may be necessary for the Judge or Magistrate to limit live, text-based\ncommunications to representatives of the media for journalistic\npurposes but to disallow its use by the wider public in court. That may\narise if it is necessary, for example, to limit the number of mobile\nelectronic devices in use at any given time because of the potential for\nelectronic interference with the court\u2019s own sound recording\nequipment, or because the widespread use of such devices in court may\ncause a distraction in the proceedings.\n\n15. Subject to these considerations, the use of an unobtrusive, hand-held,\nsilent piece of modern equipment for the purposes of simultaneous\nreporting of proceedings to the outside world as they unfold in court by\naccredited media representatives is generally unlikely to interfere with\nthe proper administration of justice.\n\n16. Permission to use live, text-based communications from court may be\nwithdrawn by the court at any time if the presiding judge considers that\nthe circumstances so require.\n\nDated the 6th day of January 2014\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 136\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n GRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014\nREQUIREMENT FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS\nMADE IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT\n\n1.\nOrders made by the Family Division of the Grand Court are not\npreferences, requests or mere indications; they are orders. Practitioners\nand those who appear before the Grand Court are reminded that orders,\nincluding interlocutory orders, must be complied with to the letter and\non time.\n\n2.\nIn Re W (A Child); Re H (Children) [2013] EWCA Civ 1177 at paras.\n52 & 53, Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division in England\nand Wales, stated:\n'The court is entitled to expect - and from now on family courts will\ndemand - strict compliance with all such orders. Non-compliance\nwith orders should be expected to have and will usually have a\nconsequence.\nLet me spell it out. An order that something is to be done by 4pm on\nFriday, is an order to do that thing by 4pm on Friday, not by 4.21\npm on Friday let alone by 3.01pm the following Monday or some\ntime later the following week. A person who finds himself unable to\ncomply timeously with his obligations under an order should apply\nfor an extension of time before the time for compliance has expired.\nIt is simply not acceptable to put forward as an explanation for noncompliance with an order the burden of other work. If the time\nallowed for compliance with an order turns out to be inadequate the\nremedy is either to apply to the court for an  extension of time or to\npass the task to someone else who has available the time in which to\ndo it.\"3\n\n3 Underlining made for the purposes of the Practice Circular\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 137\n\n3. Sir James Munby reiterated these views at page 6 of the 7th View from\nthe President's Chambers, January 2014:\n\"What .... is for me a real concern is something symptomatic of a\ndeeply rooted culture in the family courts which, however long\nestablished, will no longer be tolerated. I refer to the slapdash,\nlackadaisical and on occasions almost contumelious attitude\nwhich still far too frequently characterises the response to orders\nmade by family courts. There is simply no excuse for this. Orders,\nincluding interlocutory orders, must be obeyed and complied with\nto the letter and on time. Too often they are not. They are not\npreferences, requests or mere indications; they are orders. This\nprinciple applies as much to orders by way of interlocutory case\nmanagement directions as to any other species of order. The court\nis entitled to expect - and from now on family courts will demand -\nstrict compliance with all such orders. Both parties and nonparties to whom orders are addressed must take heed. Noncompliance with an order by anyone is bad enough. It is a\nparticularly serious matter if the defaulter is a public body. Noncompliance with orders should be expected to have and will\nusually have a consequence: see Re W (A Child), Re H (Children)\n[2013] EWCA Civ 1177.\"\n\n4. Regrettably the concerns expressed by the President of the Family\nDivision in England and Wales are equally applicable to the response\nto orders from a number of attorneys and parties involved in\nproceedings before the Family Division of the Grand Court.\n\n5. This Circular reaffirms the intention of the Judges that due regard be\npaid to the guidance given in the case law as summarised above by Sir\nJames Munby.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR NO. 1 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 138\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n6.\nAccordingly, persons who appear before the Grand Court are expected\nto comply with their plain and unqualified obligation to comply with\nthe terms of a Court order made against or in respect of them, unless or\nuntil it is discharged. This obligation applies to all forms of orders\nincluding interlocutory case management directions.\n\n7.\nIf parties are unable to comply with the terms of an order, they are not\nentitled to agree a variation of the order without obtaining the Court's\napproval, and therefore must make the appropriate application to the\nGrand Court before the time for compliance has expired.\n\nIssued by the Chief Justice following discussion with the Judges of the\nFamily Division.\n\n29 January 2014\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 139\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014\nCOMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNSEL AND THE COURT ETC.\n\nCommunications with the trial Judge\n1.  There have been recent instances of counsel attempting to\ncommunicate directly with the Judge, particularly by e-mail. This is not\npermissible, may compromise the integrity of the proceedings\nconcerned and should cease.\n\n2.  The general rule is that all out of court communications between\ncounsel and the Court, whether written or oral, should take place with\nor through the Registrar, Listing Officer or Clerk of Court.\n\n3.  It has also become common place to find correspondence between the\nattorneys included in the court bundles. Normal party and party\ncorrespondence should not be included in bundles submitted to the\ncourt. There are occasional exceptions, such as where properly\nexhibited in an affidavit as evidence on a matter in issue, where\nnecessary to support an application for a wasted costs order or where\ninclusion is expressly directed by the court.\n\nCorrespondence with the Registry\n4.  Normal party and party correspondence should not be copied to the\nRegistry. The only correspondence which should be directed to the\nRegistry is that which covers a filing, seeks a date or seeks some other\nform of action from the Registry.\n\n5.  Save as regards applications which are properly made on an ex parte\nbasis without notice to any other party, no party should communicate\nwith the Court without notice to all parties affected. In particular, save\nin such circumstances, all correspondence with the Court should be\ncopied to the other parties.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 140\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nEx parte Applications\n6.  Counsel should note that an ex parte application is not the normal or\nordinary means of applying for an injunction and the jurisdiction of the\ncourt to entertain an ex parte application for an injunction is predicated\nupon urgency. Thus GCR. 29 r. 1(2) provides:\n\n\u201c(2) Where the case is one of urgency such application may be\nmade ex parte on affidavit but, except as aforesaid, such\napplications must be made by motion or summons.\u201d\n\n7.  Counsel should also note that even where an ex parte application is\njustified on grounds of urgency, the application should ordinarily be\nmade ex parte on notice unless the giving of notice is likely to defeat\nthe application by reason of delay or may precipitate the action the\napplication is designed to prevent: see the Supreme Court Practice 1999\nEd. at 29\/1A\/21 and 29\/1A\/25. Where prior notice of an ex parte\napplication is not given, the supporting affidavit should ordinarily\nexplain why.\n\nImplementation of Orders\n8.  Counsel are reminded that in the case of Orders requiring action from\nthe Registry (e.g. the setting of a date, or an order requiring the removal\nof a matter from the list) the attorney or firm having carriage of the\nOrder should write to the Registry asking that the order be\nimplemented.\n\nDated this 6th day of January 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 141\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014\nJURY TRIALS\n\nIt is fundamental to a fair trial that jurors must have regard only to the\nevidence presented to them by the Court in arriving at their verdict. Jurors\nare invariably warned by the trial judge that taking account of irrelevant or\nextraneous matters will lead to unjust verdicts.\n\nThis fundamental principle applies with equal force to information that\njurors might themselves encounter by use of the internet and by use of\n\u201csocial media\u201d. Miscarriages of justice have been known to occur when\njurors resort to these sources of information during the course of trials.\n\nThe following direction is aimed at ensuring that jurors are advised against\nthis improper practice and of the likely consequencies.\n\nJurors will be advised by the trial judge at the commencement of the trial\nthat they must not post on the internet or in any social media any reference\nto the trial nor should they search the internet for anything related to the\ncase. It is of critical importance that jurors take account only of evidence\npresented to them in court or information brought to their attention under a\ndirection of the court. Jurors will be warned that any failure to comply with\nthese directions will be treated as a contempt of court.\n\nThe following form of words may be used to convey these important\nmessages at the discretion of the trial judge:\n\n\u201cEveryone is entitled to a fair trial and to have their guilt or innocence\ndecided only on the evidence put before the court during the trial; as a\nmember of the jury in this case, you have sworn to try it in a fair and\nimpartial manner.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 3 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 142\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nJurors must not look for information about the case themselves. You\nmust not search the internet or any other source for information that\nmay affect your consideration of the case. You must not take any\naccount of any information that comes to your attention about the trial\nother than the evidence with which you are presented in court or which\nis brought to your attention under the direction of the court.\n\nJurors are not to post on the internet or in any \u201csocial media\u201d (such as\nFace Book or Twitter) any reference at all to the trial. This includes any\nallegations, evidence or arguments during the trial.\n\nAny accessing of the internet or any posting of comments on the social\nmedia will be a contempt of court and could result in you being sent to\nprison or fined.\u201d\n\nDated this 6th day of January 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 143\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014\nORDERS FOR SALES BY PRIVATE TREATY PURSUANT TO\nSECTIONS 75 AND 77 OF THE REGISTERED LAND ACT (\u201cTHE\nRLL\u201d).\n\nThis Practice Direction supplements Practice Direction No. 5 of 2012.\n\nPREAMBLE\n\nApplications to the court for orders sanctioning sales by private treaty\npursuant to Section 77 of the RLL, are sought by way of variation of the\noperation of Section 75 which allows the chargee to sell by way of public\nauction acting \u201cin good faith and hav(ing) regard to the interests of the\nchargor.\u201d\n\nPractice Direction No. 5 of 2012 directs that the objectives of a public\nauction as contemplated by Section 75 can be achieved by way of listing on\nthe Multiple Listing System by reference to a reserve sale price that reflects\nthe fair market value of the property. This will usually be achieved by using\ntwo independent valuations (taking the median of the values where the\nvaluers disagree). Where the reserve price is not met within a reasonable\ntime, the discretion in the chargee to instruct its agent gradually to lower the\nreserve until the true market price is realised, must also be recognised.\n\n1. This practice direction confirms that an application for leave to sell by\nprivate treaty will not be entertained unless there has been a fair attempt to\nmarket the property for sale on the open market, including by way of public\nauction in keeping with Practice Direction No. 5 of 2012.\n2. Where that open market process yields an offer which the chargee wishes\nto accept but is concerned (for reason that the offer price is significantly\nbelow the reserve price or for some other good reason) to seek the sanction\nof the court pursuant to Section 77, such an application may be granted at\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 4 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 144\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthe discretion of the court. The court will, however, always be mindful of\nthe fact that a chargee is not obliged to seek the sanction of the court in the\nexercise of its power of sale granted by Section 75 and will reserve its\ndiscretion as to the appropriate order for costs that it might make upon any\napplication.\n\n3. Where it is represented to the listing officer that an application must be\ntaken urgently in order to comply with contractual deadlines for closure of\nsales, the listing officer may provide an urgent listing.\n\nDated this 6th day of January 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 145\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n(Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules 2013)\n\n1.  Where, in accordance with the Court Fees Rules (as amended and\nrevised), Rule 3(10) (as amended), the Grand Court or the Court of\nAppeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of\nthe Court, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such and\nlisted within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from\ntime to time).\n\n2.  In determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court may\nconsider whether the taxation can thereby be dealt with more\nexpeditiously taking account of the amount of the bill and the\ncomplexity of the taxation.\n\n3.  The Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10), the\nallocation to a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of\nCourt also taking into account the likely nature and complexity of the\ntaxation and any potential for a conflict of interest between any of the\ntaxing officers and any of the parties involved in the taxation.\n\n4.  Where the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10)\nany of the parties to the taxation may make representations to the Clerk\nof the Court regarding any potential conflict of interests with any of the\ntaxing officers listed in Schedule 1 at any time up to 7 days after the\nlodging of the bill for taxation.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 146\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.  The Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10\ndays of the lodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of\nthe identity of the taxing officer and the fees that are payable under\nparagraph 5(2)(a) of Part C of the First Schedule to the Rules. No\ntaxation will commence until the fees payable have been received.\n\n6.  Where fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b), the\nparties will be notified by the Clerk of Court of the amount payable\nwithin 7 days of the receipt by the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The\ncertificate will not be issued until these fees are paid.\n\n7.  Where appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate\nthe functions described under paragraphs 3- 6 to a Deputy Clerk of\nCourt or to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal.\n\nDated this 17th day of January 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 147\n\nTAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n(Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1))\n\nDecember 2013\n\nMrs. Delene Cacho (Legal Aid and general civil cases)\n\nJanuary 2014\n\nMrs. Eileen Nervik Q.C.\nHuw Moses O.B.E.\nWilliam Helfrecht\nDerek Jones\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n(Amended)\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 148\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n(Amended)\n\n1. Authority\n1.1. This Practice Direction is made by the Chief Justice in accordance with Court\nFees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10), the Grand Court or the Court\nof Appeal authorizes a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the\nCourt, the taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such as listed within\nSchedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time) pursuant\nto Order 62, Rule 3 of the Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) (\"the\nGCR\").\n2. Commencement\n2.1. This Practice Direction No. 5 of 2014 Amendment will come into effect on the\n21st January 2021.\n3. Introduction\n3.1. In furtherance of the objectives of GCR Order 62 Rule 3, Legal Aid Act, 2015\nSection 28(7) and Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule 3(10), this\nPractice Direction provides for the filing and an assigned attorney-at-law shall\nin due course submit their bill of costs to the Clerk of the Court for taxation. The\nfiling and processing of these documents will improve access to justice by\nincreasing efficiencies, timeliness and reducing costs.\n3.2. This Practice Direction applies to all existing cases as well as new cases\ncommenced on or after 21st January 2021 and can be used to file documents to\ncommence or continue cases that are already before the Court.\n3.3. The filing of documents for taxation means must be done in accordance with this\nPractice Direction.\n3.4. Where, in accordance with the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised), Rule\n3(10), the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a\nperson other than the Clerk of the Court, the taxing officer shall be a person\nappointed as such and listed within Schedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as\namended from time to time).\n3.5. In determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court may consider\nwhether the taxation can thereby be dealt with more expeditiously taking\naccount of the amount of the bill and the complexity of the taxation.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 149\n\n3.6. The Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10), the allocation\nto a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of Court also taking into\naccount the likely nature and complexity of the taxation and any potential for a\nconflict of interest between any of the taxing officers and any of the parties\ninvolved in the taxation.\n3.7. Where the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(10) any of the\nparties to the taxation may make representations to the Clerk of the Court\nregarding any potential conflict of interests with any of the taxing officers listed\nin Schedule 1 at any time up to 7 days after the lodging of the bill for taxation.\n3.8. The Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10 days of\nthe lodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of the identity of\nthe taxing officer and the fees that are payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) of Part\nC of the First Schedule to the Rules. No taxation will commence until the fees\npayable have been received.\n3.9. Where fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b), the parties will be\nnotified by the Clerk of Court of the amount payable within 7 days of the receipt\nby the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The certificate will not be issued until\nthese fees are paid.\n3.10. Where appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate the\nfunctions described under paragraphs 3- 6 to a Deputy Clerk of Court or to the\nRegistrar of the Court of Appeal.\n\nDated this 21st day of January 2021\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 5 OF 2014\n(Amended)\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 150\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSchedule 1\nTAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n(Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1))\n\nDecember 2013\nMrs. Delene Cacho (Legal Aid and general civil cases) \u2013 retired effective\nJanuary 2021\n\nJanuary 2014\nMrs. Eileen Nervik Q.C. \u2013 retired effective January 2021\nHuw Moses O.B.E.\nWilliam Helfrecht \u2013 retired effective 2019\nDerek Jones\n\nJanuary 2021\nDerek Jones (Legal Aid and general civil cases)\nRobert Jones (Legal Aid and general civil cases)\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 151\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014\nProcedure for making Summary Court Applications pursuant to the\nPolice Act (as amended and revised) on Weekends and Public\nHolidays\nWhere an application for an order to extend the period of time a person may\nbe kept in detention by the police requires to be made to a Summary Court\non a weekend or a public holiday, the following protocol will be observed:-\n\n1.  The responsible officer of the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service\n(\u201cRCIPS\u201d) shall communicate the need for an application to Crown\nCounsel, who will in turn contact the \u201cdesignated court officer\u201d (that\nis, the person identified by the Court Administrator or Clerk of Court\nfor that purpose) and for these purposes telephone and email contact\ndetails of the designated court officer will be provided by notice to all\ninterested parties. An appointed time for appearance for a hearing\nbefore a Summary Court will then be provided.\n\n2.  The responsible officer of the RCIPS must notify the Defence Counsel\nidentified by the detainee to represent that detainee of the appointed\ntime for attendance before the court.\n\n3.  When contacting the designated court officer, Crown Counsel will\na.  confirm that notice of the intended application was served on the\ndetainee\nb.  provide the name of Defence Counsel (if any) to be present, and\nc.  advise whether an Interpreter is required for the hearing.\n\n4. The designated court officer will ensure that\na.  the designated Magistrate is contacted as soon as possible after\nbeing advised of the time for the hearing\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 6 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 152\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nb.  all necessary arrangements for the conduct of the hearing are made\nc.  Crown Counsel (and when known Defence Counsel) are advised\nof the courtroom and time fixed for the hearing\nd.  the attendance of a court Interpreter, should one be required, is\narranged and\ne. the attendance of a RCIPS Auxiliary Officer assigned to the courts\nas security officer is arranged.\n\n5.  The responsible officer of the RCIPS will transport the detainee to and\n(where an extension of the period of detention is allowed) from Court\nand will liaise with the RCIPS Auxiliary Officer for access to the\nCourthouse.\n\nDated this 30th day of April 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 153\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\n(Remand Proceedings by way of teleconference) - Criminal\nProcedure Code (as amended and revised)\n\n1.  Where the Court directs that remand proceedings be conducted by\nteleconference in accordance with section 60 of the Criminal\nProcedure Code (as amended and revised) (\u201cCPC\u201d), an accused person\nconfined in prison will appear before the court by live television link\nfrom His Majesty\u2019s Prisons (\u201cHMP\u201d) whether or not also represented\nby counsel present in court.\n\nScheduled Hearings\n2.  Where the Court makes a direction in accordance with section 60 of the\nCPC, hearings by teleconference will be scheduled on Tuesdays and\nFridays, or on any other day that Criminal Mention Hearings are fixed.\n3.  Teleconference hearings between the Court and HMP will commence\nat 12 noon, or at any other time fixed by the presiding Magistrate and\ncommunicated to the parties in advance.\n4.  The time allotted for the appearance of each defendant on a remand\nhearing will be no more than 15 minutes unless the Court otherwise\ndirects.\n\nUnscheduled Hearings\n5.  Where it becomes apparent that an unscheduled hearing by\nteleconference would be the most appropriate way to proceed, the\nDirector of Prisons or Defence Counsel may request that the Court so\ndirects.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 154\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n6.  A request for an unscheduled hearing must be made to the \u201cdesignated\ncourt officer\u201d (that is, the person identified for that purpose by the\nCourt Administrator or Clerk of Court. The designated officer (to be\nidentified in Court Lists published weekly and available at\nwww.judicial.ky) will seek the appropriate direction of the Chief\nMagistrate.\n\n7. Where the Court so directs, the designated court officer will inform or\ndirect that all persons concerned are informed of the date and time fixed\nfor the hearing, and will ensure that arrangements are made for the\nhearing; including co-ordination with the Director of Prisons.\n\nService of Documents\n8.  If during the course of a teleconference hearing it becomes necessary\nor appropriate to serve documents (such as prosecution evidentiary or\ndisclosure material) on a defendant who is confined at HMP, the\ndocuments may be served on Defence Counsel representing the\ndefendant in court and Defence Counsel will be responsible for the\ndelivery of the documents to the defendant at HMP unless the court is\npersuaded to otherwise direct.\n9.  Where the defendant is unrepresented, Crown Counsel will be\nresponsible for the delivery of the documents to the defendant at HMP\nunless the court is persuaded to otherwise direct.\n\nPre-Court Conferences\n10.  Where a hearing has been scheduled in accordance with section 60 of\nthe CPC, the Court will facilitate one half-hour private Pre-Court\nConference by television link between Defence Counsel and the\nrespective defendants detained at HMP.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 155\n\n11.  Such a Pre-Court Conference shall be attended by Defence Counsel and\nby the assigned social worker or probation officer (if Defence Counsel\nso indicates in advance on behalf of the defendant) and no other person\nwill be permitted to attend unless the Court so directs.\n\n12. Pre-Court Conferences may be scheduled on Mondays, Wednesdays or\nThursdays between the hours of 2.00 pm and 4.00 pm by contacting the\ndesignated officer who will allot the respective times for use of the\ncourt television link facilities. Requests for links for Pre \u2013Court\nConferences must be made at least 24 hours in advance to allow\nnotification by the courts to HMP to ensure that the defendant will be\nproduced at the other end of the link at HMP at the time arranged.\n\n13. If for any reason it is not possible for the Court to facilitate a Pre-Court\nConference, Defence Counsel will nonetheless remain responsible for\ntaking such instructions from defendants as may be necessary for their\nrepresentation at the scheduled remand hearing.\n\nCo-ordination with HMP: Scheduled hearings and Pre-Court\nConferences\n14.  By no later than 2:00 pm on the day prior to any Scheduled hearing or\nany Pre-Court Conference, the Courts will notify the Director of\nPrisons by email or fax of the name(s) of the defendant(s) who will\nappear by television link and of the time allotted for the appearance of\neach defendant, and the Director of Prisons will be responsible for\nensuring the production of the defendant for the appearance at HMP at\nthe appointed time. These email (or fax) notices will be copied to the\nrespective Defence Counsel and to the Office of the Director of Public\nProsecutions.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 7 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 156\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n15.  By no later than 9:30 am on the morning of any hearing (or in the case\nof a Pre-Court Conference, at least half hour before the appointed time)\nthe Director of Prisons will be responsible for notifying the designated\nofficer of any anticipated difficulty with ensuring the appearance of a\ndefendant for the time appointed for that defendant\u2019s appearance.\n\n16.  By no later than 9:45 am, the court will be notified of any such\ndifficulty to allow for the making of any alternative directions as may\nbe appropriate in the circumstances.\n\nDated this 30th day of April 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 157\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE CIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\n(GCR O. 52)\n(GCR O.6(11)\nCOMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT \u2013 FAMILY DIVISION and IN\n\u201cCOURT OF PROTECTION MATTERS\u201d\n\n1.  It is a fundamental principle of the administration of justice in the\nCayman Islands that applications for committal for contempt should be\nheard and decided in public, that is, in open court.\n\n2.  The Grand Court when dealing with matters concerning the property of\na person under disability or when dealing with the applications arising\nout of proceedings relating to a child,4 is vested with a discretionary\npower to hear a committal application in private protection matters.\nThis discretion should be exercised only in exceptional cases where it\nis necessary in the interest of justice. The fact that the committal\napplication is being made in respect of a protection matter does not of\nitself justify the application being heard in private. Moreover the fact\nthat the hearing of the committal application may involve the disclosure\nof material which ought not to be published does not of itself justify\nhearing the application in private if such publication can be restrained\nby an appropriate order.\n\n3.  If, in an exceptional case, a committal application is heard in private\nand the court finds that a person has committed a contempt of court it\nmust state in public as required by Order 52 rule 6(2) of the Grand\nCourt Rules:\n\n4 That is: in terms of GCR O.52(5)(i)(a) in relation to children: \u201cwhere the application arises out of proceedings\nrelating to the wardship or adoption of an infant or wholly or mainly to the guardianship, custody, maintenance\nor upbringing of a child, or rights of access to a child\u201d.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 158\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(a)  the name of that person;\n(b)  in general terms the nature of the contempt of court in respect of\nwhich the committal order [\u201ccommittal order\u201d for this purpose\nincludes a suspended committal order] is being made; and\n(c)  the punishment being imposed.\n\nThis is mandatory; there are no exceptions. There are never any\ncircumstances in which any one may be committed to custody without\nthese matters being publicly stated.\n\n4.  Committal applications should at the outset be listed and heard in\npublic. This applies to every committal application without exception.\nThe application should be shown in the public court list as follows:\nFOR HEARING IN OPEN COURT\nApplication by [full names of applicant] for\nThe Committal to prison of\n[full names of the person alleged to be in contempt]\n\n5.  Whenever the court decides to exercise its discretion to sit in private\nthe judge should, before continuing the hearing in private, give reasons\nin public for doing so. At the conclusion of any hearing in private the\njudge should sit in public to comply with the requirements set out in\nparagraph 3. If the judge, having decided to continue in private,\nadjourns the hearing to a future date the application should be shown\nin the public court list as:\nFOR HEARING IN PRIVATE\nApplication by [full names of applicant] for\nThe Committal to prison of\n[full names of the person alleged to be in contempt]\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nCIRCULAR No. 9 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 159\n\n6.  A person who is not a party to the proceedings is not entitled as of right\nto a copy of the application notice. The court may, however, authorise\nsuch a person to obtain a copy. If in an exceptional case the court\ndecides that a copy of the application notice is not to be made available\nto a person who requests it, the judge must set out in writing the reasons\nfor doing so.\n\n7.  Whenever a committal application is being heard in public the judge\nand the attorneys should be robed.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 160\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\n(Section 9(4) of the Children Act (as amended and revised)\nCOURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S REPORTS\n\n1. Duties of reporter\n1.1  Where the court directs an enquiry and report by a court welfare\n\nofficer,5 the Children Act (as amended and revised) provides6 that it is\nthe function of that officer to assist the court by investigating the\ncircumstances of the child, or children, concerned and the important\npersons in their lives, to report what that officer sees and hears, to offer\nthe court that officer\u2019s assessment of the situation and, where\nappropriate to make a recommendation. In such circumstances, it is not\nthe role of the welfare officer to attempt conciliation, although that\nofficer may encourage the parties to settle their differences if the\nlikelihood of a settlement arises during the course of that officer\u2019s\nenquiries.\n\n5 A social worker, employed by the Department of Children and Family Services or such other person as the\nDepartment considers appropriate.\n6 Section 9 of the 2012 Revision which also (in subsection (4) provides that it shall be the duty of Department\nof Children and Family Services to comply with the direction of the Court.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 161\n\n1.2  The report must be filed by the court welfare officer at the court by or\non the ordered date. If exceptional circumstances necessitate an\nextension of time to enable completion of the report, the welfare officer\nmust make a timely written request to the court. The court welfare\nofficer, in that officer\u2019s written request for an extension of time to file\nthe report, shall set out detailed reasons why this is required, the date\nthat the case was allocated to the court welfare officer and the requested\nnew date for submission. It is not to be assumed that an extension will\nbe granted and the welfare officer must proceed to meet the deadline\nunless and until the judge grants the extension.\n\n1.3 Where in the course of preparing a report in private law proceedings,\nthe court welfare officer becomes aware that a child may have been\nabused, the reporter is not fettered from exercising that officer\u2019s\nindependent discretion in reporting that officer\u2019s findings to the\nDepartment of Children and Family Services or to the police. However,\nthat officer must inform the Judge of the steps that officer has taken at\nthe earliest opportunity so that the Judge can consider the impact of the\ndevelopment and the need for consequential directions.\n\n2. Confidential nature of the report\n2.1 The following wording must be boldly endorsed on all court welfare\nreports filed in Family Division proceedings and on all copies which\nare supplied to the parties and their attorneys.\n\n\u201cThis report has been prepared for the court and should be treated as\nconfidential. It mustnot be shown nor its contents revealed to any\nperson other than a party or a legal adviserto such a party. Such legal\nadviser may make use of the report in connection with an application\nfor legal aid.\u201d\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 162\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3. General considerations when requesting a court welfare officer\u2019s\nreport\n3.1  When a report is ordered, the court shall promptly complete a written\nReferral Form 7 which shall be promptly submitted to the Department\nof Children and Family Services. The Referral Form shall contain a\nvery brief note of the background to the case, details of the\norder\/directions made at the time of the referral, the required\nsubmission date for the report and an indication whether the court\n\nwelfare officer is required to attend the hearing. Subject to any order\nthat the court may make, if a party no longer requires the attendance of\nthe court welfare officer at the hearing that party must notify the court\nat least five clear working days prior to the hearing.\n3.2 The court shall specify in the Referral Form those matters on which the\nreport is to be made.\n\n3.3 Such specifications will not prevent the reporting officer from bringing\nto the notice of the court any other matters which the reporting officer\nconsiders that the court should have in mind.\n\n3.4 The court when submitting the Referral Form to the Department of\nChildren and Family Services shall attach a copy of the Background\nInformation Form8 to facilitate the court welfare officer in making\ninitial contact with the parties.\n\n3.5 Before ordering a report, the court should balance the need for a report\nagainst the effect of delay caused by the preparation of the report.\n\n3 Appendix 1.\n4 Appendix 2.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 163\n\n3.6 In deciding whether a report should be ordered, consideration should be\ngiven to:\n(a)  determining what issues require a report and how important they\nare;\n(b)  whether these issues are likely to be resolved by mediation. If they\ncan, the court should consider whether a decision on ordering a\nreport should be postponed until mediation has taken place;\n(c)  whether the report is likely to produce factual information which\nthe court needs to resolve the issues;\n(d)  whether the court, depending on the nature of the issues involved,\nneeds professional advice;\n(e)  what delay will the preparation of the report cause and how\ndetrimental would that be; and\n(f)  whether it is appropriate to delay a decision on whether to order a\nreport.\n3.7  Bearing in mind that contested Children Act (as amended and revised)\ncases often take several days to be heard, in cases where the attendance\nof the reporting officer is required, the parties shall agree a convenient\ndate and time for the reporting officer\u2019s attendance before the court.\n\nDated this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 164\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nAPPENDIX 1\n\nREFERRAL FORM \u2013 COURT WELFARE OFFICER\u2019S\nREPORT\n\nFor the Attention of: The Cayman Islands Department of Children and\nFamily Services\nPlease note: Section 9 (4) of the Children Act (as amended and revised)\nprovides that \u201cit shall be the duty of the Department to comply with any\nrequest for a report under this section.\u201d\nCause No \/20\nJudge:\nApplicant:\nRespondent:\nChild:\n\n(DOB\n) \u2013Aged\n\n- Male\/Female\nReferred to:\n\nInvestigative\n\nCounselling\n\nReport on issue of\nrequested:\nTO BE FILED NO LATER THAN__________________ \u2013 No\nextensions will be given without permission of the Court, to be granted\nonly upon written application to the Court by the Court Welfare\nOfficer\nInterim\n\nSpecial Request\n\nComprehensive\n\nOrder:\n(1) (directions and orders made) .\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 165\n\n(2)\n(3)\n(4)\n(5)  The reporting officer(, who will be notified of the date,) is to attend the\nfinal hearing(at    am\/pm on       day of         20  ) of this matter unless\nnotified otherwise by the Court.\n(6)  The parties are to notify the Court by no later than 5 working days prior\nto the final hearing if they do not require the Reporting Officer to attend\nthe hearing\n\nFurther Details:\n(set out brief background)\n\nThe Court seeks a report in relation to\n\nThe Welfare officer is requested to\n\nReport ordered by:\nDate:             day of                                  20\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 166\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nAppendix 2\nGRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS\nFAMILY DIVISION\nBACKGROUND DETAILS FORM\n\nCAUSE NO.____________________\nPARTIES:\nApplicant:\n\nRespondent:\n\n__________________________     vs.  ____________________________\n\nApplicant\u2019s Address\/ Contact Details:  Respondent\u2019s Address\/Contact Details:\nHouse\/Apt #:_________________ House\/Apt #:_____________________\nStreet: ______________________ Street:__________________________\nDistrict: _____________________ District:_________________________\nWork Phone: _________________ Work Phone: ____________________\nCell Phone:___________________ Cell Phone: _____________________\nEmail: ______________________ Email:__________________________\nOther Email: _________________ Other Email: _____________________\n\nApplicant\u2019s Attorney:\n\nRespondent\u2019s Attorney:\nName: _____________________  Name:__________________________\nFirm: ______________________  Firm: __________________________\nPhone: _____________________  Phone: _________________________\nEmail: _____________________  Email: _________________________\n\nDated this        day of                               20      .\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 167\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nCOURT BUNDLES IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY\nDIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT\n\n1. Introduction\n1.1  In Re X and Y (Bundles) [2008] 2 FLR 2053, Munby J (as he was then)\nissued a stern warning in open court to all practitioners, pointing out\nthat far too often the requirements of the 2006 Practice Direction in\nEngland and Wales concerning court bundles were not observed and\nthat this was unacceptable. Munby J indicated that orders for costs can\nbe made against either the party in default or against the defaulting\nlawyers. Furthermore, he warned that in particularly flagrant cases,\ndefaulters may be publicly identified in open court.\n\n1.2 Regrettably, the concerns expressed are equally applicable to the\nCayman Islands due to frequent non-compliance with Practice\nDirection No. 2\/96. Bundles are often incomplete or not up to date.\nBundles often arrive late or not at all. Too often bundles, skeleton\narguments and other preliminary documents are handed in on the\nevening before or on the morning of the hearing.\n\n1.3 This Practice Direction is issued to achieve consistency in the\npreparation of court bundles and in respect of other related matters\nheard in the Family Division of the Grand Court. The Practice Direction\nsets out very prescriptive requirements as to the content and format of\nthe \u2018preliminary documents\u2019 which are to be included in every bundle.\nThis will enable the judge to embark upon the necessary pre-reading in\na structured and focused way and thereby, at the outset of the hearing,\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 168\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nallowing the parties to proceed immediately to the heart of the matter,\nwithout the need for any substantial opening andwith the parties\nfocusing upon previously identified issues. The practice direction will\nalso ensure that the bundles are paginated, in an organised form and\nencourage careful consideration to what documents should actually be\nincluded in the bundle. The objective is to shorten the length of hearings\nand to ensure that litigants who comply with practice directions do not\nsuffer delay and prejudice as a result of the default or poor preparation\nof others.\n\n2. Application of the practice direction\n2.1  The following practice applies to all hearings in the Family Division of\nthe Grand Court except for:\n(a)  cases listed for one hour or less; and\n(b)  the hearing of any urgent application where and to the extent that\nit is impracticable to comply with the practice.\n\n3. Responsibility for the Preparation of the bundle\n3.1 A bundle for the use of the court at the hearing shall be provided by the\nparty in the position of applicant at the hearing (or, if there are crossapplications, by the party whose application was first in time) or, if that\nperson is a litigant in person, by the first listed respondent who is not a\nlitigant in person.\n\n3.2 The party preparing the bundle shall paginate it. If possible the contents\nof the bundle shall be agreed by all parties.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 169\n\n4. Contents of the bundle\n4.1  The bundle shall contain copies of all documents relevant to the\nhearing, in chronological order from the front of the bundle, paginated\nand indexed, and divided into separate sections (each section being\nseparately paginated) as follows:\n(a)  preliminary documents (see paragraph 4.2) and any other case\nmanagement documents required by any other practice direction;\n(b)  applications and orders;\n(c)  statements and affidavits (which must be dated in the top right\ncorner of the front page);\n(d)  care plans (where appropriate);\n(e)  experts\u2019 reports and other reports (including those of a social\nworker or children\u2019s guardian ad litem); and\n(f) other documents, divided into further sections as may be\nappropriate.\n4.2  At the commencement of the bundle there shall be inserted the\nfollowing documents (the preliminary documents):\n(a)  an up to date summary of the background to the hearing confined\nto those matters which are relevant to the hearing and the\nmanagement of the case and limited, if practicable, to one A4\npage;9\n(b)  a statement of the issue or issues to be determined (1) at that\nhearing and (2) at the final hearing;\n(c)  a position statement by each party including a summary of the\norder or directions sought by that party (1) at that hearing and (2)\nat the final hearing;\n(d)  an up to date chronology, if it is a final hearing or if the summary\nunder 4.2(a) is insufficient;\n\n1 Note that GCR Order 66 r.1 provides that unless impracticable, every document prepared by a party for use in\nthe Court must be on letter sized paper and suggests that A4 paper should only be used where unavoidable.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 170\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(e)  skeleton arguments, if appropriate, with copies of all authorities\nrelied on; and\n(f)  a list of essential reading for that hearing.\n\n4.3 Each of the preliminary documents shall state on the front page\nimmediately below the heading the date when it was prepared and the\ndate of the hearing for which it was prepared.\n\n4.4 The summary of the background, statement of issues, chronology,\nposition statement and any skeleton arguments shall be crossreferenced to the relevant pages of the bundle.\n\n4.5 The summary of the background, statement of issues, chronology and\nreading list shall in the case of a final hearing, and shall so far as\npracticable in the case of any other hearing, each consist of a single\ndocument in a form agreed by all parties. Where the parties disagree as\nto the content the fact of their disagreement and their differing\ncontentions shall be set out at the appropriate places in the document.\n\n4.6 Where the nature of the hearing is such that a complete bundle of all\ndocuments is unnecessary, the bundle (which need not be repaginated)\nmay comprise only those documents necessary for the hearing, but\n(a)  the summary (paragraph 4.2(a)) must commence with a statement\nthat the bundle is limited or incomplete; and\n(b)  the bundle shall if reasonably practicable be in a form agreed by\nall parties.\n\n4.7  Where the bundle is re-lodged in accordance with paragraph 8.2, before\nit is re-lodged:\n(a)  the bundle shall be updated as appropriate; and\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 171\n\n(b)  all superseded documents (and in particular all outdated\nsummaries, statements of issues, chronologies, skeleton arguments\nand similar documents) shall be removed from the bundle.\n\n5. Format of the bundle10\n5.1  The bundle shall be contained in one or more A4 size ring binders (each\nring binder being limited to no more than 350 pages). Bundles not\nexceeding 50 pages in length may be firmly stapled in the top left hand\ncorner and shall be punched with a hole for filing.\n\n5.2  All ring binders shall have clearly marked on the front and the spine:\n(a)  the title and number of the action;\n(b)  the court where the case has been listed;\n(c)  the hearing date and time;\n(d)  if known, the name of the judge hearing the case; and\n(e)  a description or index of the documents contained therein; and\n(f)  where there is more than one ring binder, a distinguishing letter\n(A, B, C etc).\n\n6. Timetable for preparing and lodging the bundle\n6.1 The party preparing the bundle shall, whether or not the bundle has been\nagreed, provide a paginated index to all other parties not less than 5\nworking days before the hearing.\n\n6.2 The bundle (with the exception of the preliminary documents if and\ninsofar as they are not then available) shall be lodged with the court not\nless than 3 working days before the hearing, or at such other time as\nmay be specified by the judge.\n\n2 See GCR Order 66 r.5\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 172\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n6.3 The preliminary documents shall be lodged with the court no later than\n9.30 am on the day before the hearing and if the name of the judge is\nknown, shall at the same time be sent by email to the judge\u2019s personal\nassistant.\n\n7. Lodging the bundle\n7.1  Unless the judge has given some other direction as to where the bundle\nin any particular case is to be lodged (for example a direction that the\nbundle is to be lodged with the judge\u2019s personal assistant) the bundle\nshall be lodged at the office of the Family Proceedings Unit at the\nGrand Court.\n\n7.2 Any bundle sent to the court by post or courier shall be clearly addressed\nto the appropriate office and shall show the date and place of the\nhearing on the outside of any packaging as well as on the bundle itself.\n\n7.3 Parties shall:\n(a)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are delivered personally,\nensure that they obtain a receipt from the clerk\/court officer\naccepting it or them;\n(b)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are sent by post, ensure that\nthey obtain proof of posting or dispatch; and\n(c)  if the bundle or preliminary documents are sent by courier obtain\nproof of delivery.\n\nThe receipt (or proof of posting, dispatch or delivery, as the case may\nbe) shall be brought to court on the day of the hearing and must be\nproduced to the court if requested.If the receipt (or proof of posting\ndispatch or delivery) cannot be produced to the court the judge may:\n(i)  treat the bundle as having not been lodged; and\n(ii)  take the steps referred to in paragraph 11.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 173\n\n7.4  Bundles or preliminary documents delivered after 9.30 am on the day\nbefore the hearing will not be accepted by the Family Proceedings Unit\nand shall be delivered directly to the judge\u2019s personal assistant.\n\n8. Removing and re-lodging the bundle\n8.1  Following completion of the hearing the party responsible for the\nbundle shall retrieve it from the court immediately or, if that is not\npracticable, (for instance, if needed by the judge for writing a ruling or\njudgment), shall collect it from the court within 5 working days.\nBundles which are not collected in due time may be destroyed.\n\n8.2  The bundle shall be re-lodged for the next and any further hearings in\naccordance with the provisions of this practice direction and in a form\nwhich complies with paragraph 4.7.\n\n9. Time Estimates\n9.1  In every case a time estimate (which shall be inserted at the front of the\nbundle) shall be prepared which shall so far as practicable be agreed by\nall parties and shall:\n(a)  specify separately:\n(i)  the time estimated to be required for judicial pre-reading; and\n(ii)  the time required for hearing all evidence and submissions;\nand\n(b)  be prepared on the basis that before they give evidence all\nwitnesses will have read all relevant filed statements and reports.\n\n9.2  Once a case has been listed, any change in time estimates shall be\nnotified immediately by telephone (and then immediately confirmed in\nwriting) to the Listing Office.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 174\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n10. Taking cases out of the list\n10.1 As soon as it becomes known that a hearing will no longer be required,\nwhether as a result of the parties reaching agreement or for any other\nreason, the parties and their representatives shall immediately notify\nthe court by telephone and by letter. The letter, which shall wherever\n\npossible be a joint letter sent on behalf of all parties with their\nsignatures applied or appended, shall include:\n(a)  a short background summary of the case;\n(b)  the written consent of each party who consents and, where a party\ndoes not consent, details of the steps which have been taken to\nobtain that party\u2019s consent and, where known, an explanation of\nwhy that consent has not been given;\n(c)  a draft of the order being sought; and\n(d)  enough information to enable the court to decide:\n(i)  whether to take the case out of the list; and\n(ii)  whether to make the proposed order.\n\n11. Penalties for failure to comply with the practice direction\n11.1 Failure to comply with any part of this practice direction may result in\nthe judge removing the case from the list or putting the case further\nback in the list and may also result in a \u201cwasted costs\u201d order or some\nother adverse costs order.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 175\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 12 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nARRIVAL OF CHILDREN IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS BY AIR\n\n1.  Where a person seeks an order for the return to that person of children\nabout to arrive in the Cayman Islands by air and desires to have\ninformation to enable that person to meet the aircraft, the Judge should\nbe asked to include in that Judge\u2019s order a direction that the airline or\nperson operating the flight, and, if that person has the information, the\nimmigration officer at the appropriate airport, should supply such\ninformation to that person.\n\n2.  To obtain such information in such circumstances in a case where a\nperson already has an order for the return to that person of children,\nthat person should apply to a judge ex parte for directions for those\npurposes.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 176\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 13 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nCONTRIBUTION ORDERS\n\n1.  Paragraph 19(6) of Schedule 2 to the Children Act (as amended and\nrevised) provides that where \u2013\n(a)  a contribution order is in force;\n(b)  the Department of Children and Family Services serve another\ncontribution notice; and\n(c)  the contributor and the Department reach an agreement under\nparagraph 18(7) in respect of that other contribution notice, the\neffect of the agreement shall be to discharge the order from the\ndate on which it is agreed that the agreement shall take effect.\n2.  Where the Department of Children and Family Services notifies the\ncourt of an agreement reached under paragraph 19(6) of Schedule 2 to\nthe Children Act (as amended and revised), the notification must be\nsent in writing to the designated officer of the court.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie QC,\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 177\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nRECOMMENDED PRACTICES IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE\nGRAND COURT WHEN INITIATING DIRECT JUDICIAL\nCOMMUNICATION WITH A JUDGE IN A FOREIGN COURT\n\nIntroduction\nJudges in the Cayman Islands may have to communicate directly with\njudges in foreign jurisdictions, in particular in cases involving allegations\nof abduction of children. This may happen when there are concurrent\nproceedings relating to the same parties in each jurisdiction. It involves\ncommunication between judges, with the knowledge of the parties, possibly\nin a joint hearing with the parties and their attorneys at law present. The\npurpose of the communication is to coordinate and harmonise the\nproceedings so that a resolution of all of the outstanding issues can be\nreached in a just, timely and cost effective manner. The communications do\nnot relate to the merits of either proceedings.\n\nThis Practice Direction and the guidance it contains are intended to establish\na consistent and fair procedure which does not interfere with the judicial\nindependence of either court.\n\n1. Due process and transparency\n1.1 Every Judge engaging in direct judicial communication must respect the\nlaw in that Judge\u2019s jurisdiction.\n\n1.2 Notification of the parties about communication: - The parties and\/or\nattorneys at law involved should be notified in advance if possible of\nthe nature of the proposed communication provided that such notice\ndoes not unduly delay the process.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 178\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n1.3 Record of the communication \u2014\n(a)  Judges involved in a particular communication should keep a\nrecord of what was discussed preferably using a recording device\nor court reporter.\n(b)  The record should be available to the parties and the judge in the\nother jurisdiction if requested.\n(c) Any correspondence, emails or other written communication\nbetween judges should be preserved for the record.\n\n1.4 Participation of the parties \u2014\n(a)  If both judges involved in the communication agree, the parties or\ntheir attorney at law may be permitted to be present during the\ncommunication.\n(b)  If both judges involved in the communication agree to permit one\nparty or attorney at law to be present, then the other party or\nattorney at law should be permitted to be present.\n(c)  Unless it would unduly delay the process, parties or their attorney\nat law would be encouraged to be present for example via\nconference call facility.\n(d)  If both judges involved in the communication agree, the parties or\ntheir attorney at law may be permitted to speak during the\ncommunication.\n(e)  If the judges involved in the communication agree to permit one\nparty or attorney-at-law to speak, then the other party or attorney\nat law should be permitted a chance to answer.\n(f)  Consideration may be given to allow the attorneys at law to submit\na question or provide information relating to the proposed\ncommunication.\n1.5 Language \u2014 Because of the necessity for clarity and precision, where\nthere are language differences, and where interpretation is needed,\nprofessional interpreters are preferred.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 179\n\n1.6 Consensus or Arrangements: - Confirmation of any consensus or\narrangements reached as between judges should be confirmed in\nwriting and made available to the parties.\n\n2. Nature of the request to communicate\n2.1  Is there a question of foreign law or procedure to discuss with a judge\nin the foreign jurisdiction?\na)  Is there a case pending before the foreign court?\nb)  If so, is there a need to speak with the judge who actually handled\nportions of the case, or will any judge in the foreign jurisdiction\nsuffice?\nc)  If no case is pending, consider the difficulty in finding a judge with\nwhom to communicate in the foreign jurisdiction. In this instance,\nif the case is a Hague Convention case, if there is a Hague Network\njudge, consider contacting that judge.\n\n2.2  The judge involved in the communication should avoid discussions\nwith the foreign judge about the merits of the case.\n\n2.3  If it is a Hague Convention case, can the question be answered or dealt\nwith by the Central Authority in your jurisdiction or the Central\nAuthority in the foreign jurisdiction? If it can, consider having the\nCentral Authority address the issue or obtain the information.\n\n2.4 Specific examples of questions of foreign law or procedure that may\narise in Hague Convention cases include \u2014\n(a)  scheduling of the case in the foreign jurisdiction\n(i)  making of interim orders, e.g. support, protection orders;\n(ii)  availability of expedited hearings;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 180\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(b)  availability of protective orders for the child or either parent;\n(c)  can the foreign court accept and enforce undertakings offered by\nthe parties in your jurisdiction?\n(d)  is the foreign court willing to entertain a mirror order (same order\nin both jurisdictions) if the parties are in agreement?\n(e)  are criminal charges pending in the foreign jurisdiction against an\nabducting parent?\n(f)  can the abducting parent return to the foreign jurisdiction if an\norder is made returning the child to that jurisdiction?\n(g)  what services are available to the family or the child upon the\nreturn of the child?\n(h) logistics of returning the child.\n\n3. Setting up the communication and initiating the contact\n3.1  Where appropriate, the initiating judge should invite the parties or their\nattorneys at law to make submissions as to whether there should be\ndirect judicial communication and the nature of the communication;\n\n3.2 If the initiating judge decides such communication should be made\nhe\/she may do so by \u2014\n(a)  contacting the judge directly; or\n(b)  contacting the Hague Network judge for the Cayman Islands who\nwill assist in facilitating communication between the initiating\njudge and the appropriate judge in the other jurisdiction.\n3.3  The initial communication should be in writing (fax or e-mail) and\nshould identify \u2014\n(a)  the initiating judge;\n(b)  the nature of the case (with due regard to confidentiality concerns);\n(c)  the issue on which communication is sought;\n(d)  whether further documents should be exchanged;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 14 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 181\n\n(e)  when the communication should occur (with due regard to time\ndifferences);\n(f)  any specific questions which the initiating judge would like\nanswered;\n(g)  any other pertinent matters.\n\n3.4 Unless the initiating judge decides otherwise, all written\ncommunications should be copied to the parties or their attorney-atlaw.\n\n3.5 If the other jurisdiction is not English speaking, the initiating judge\nshould make their best efforts to have the initial communication\nappropriately translated.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 182\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nINHERENT JURISDICTION (INCLUDING WARDSHIP) PROCEEDINGS\n\n1. The Nature of Inherent Jurisdiction Proceedings\n1.1  It is the duty of the court under its inherent jurisdiction to ensure that a\nchild who is the subject of proceedings is protected and properly taken\ncare of. The court may in exercising its inherent jurisdiction make any\norder or determine any issue in respect of a child unless limited by case\nlaw or statute. Such proceedings should not be commenced unless it is\nclear that the issues concerning the child cannot be resolved under the\nChildren Act (as amended and revised).\n\n1.2 The court may under its inherent jurisdiction, in addition to all of the\norders which can be made in family proceedings, make a wide range of\ninjunctions for the child\u2019s protection of which the following are the\nmost common \u2013\n(a)  orders to restrain publicity;\n(b)  orders to prevent an undesirable association;\n(c)  orders relating to medical treatment;\n(d)  orders to protect abducted children, or children where the case has\nanother substantial foreign element; and\n(e)  orders for the return of children to and from another state.\n\n1.3  The court\u2019s wardship jurisdiction is part of and not separate from the\ncourt\u2019s inherent jurisdiction. The distinguishing characteristics of\nwardship are that \u2013\n(a)  custody of a child who is a ward is vested in the court; and\n(b)  although day to day care and control of the ward is given to an\nindividual or to the Department of Children and Family Services,\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 183\n\nno important step can be taken in the child\u2019s life without the court\u2019s\nconsent.\n2. Parties\n2.1 Where the child has formed or is seeking to form an association,\nconsidered to be undesirable, with another person, that other person\nshould not be made a party to the application. Such a person may be\nmade a respondent only to an application within the proceedings for an\ninjunction or committal. Such a person should not be added to the title\nof the proceedings nor allowed to see any documents other than those\nrelating directly to the proceedings for the injunction or committal.\nThat person should be allowed time to obtain representation and any\ninjunction should in the first instance extend over a few days only.\n\n3. Removal from jurisdiction\n3.1  A child who is a ward of court may not be removed from the Cayman\nIslands without the court\u2019s permission. Practice Direction No. 16 of\n2014 (International Child Abduction) deals in detail with locating and\nprotecting children at risk of unlawful removal.\n\n3.2 Where care and control has been given to the Department of Children\nand Family Services, or to an individual, it is permissible for the court\nto give general leave to make arrangements to remove the ward for\ntemporary visits abroad in suitable cases, thereby obviating the need to\nmake application for leave, each time it is desired to remove the ward\nfrom the jurisdiction. General leave is conditional upon the party\nobtaining the order lodging at the registry of the Family Division at\nleast seven days before each proposed departure:\n(a)  a written consent in unqualified terms by the other party or parties\nto the ward\u2019s leaving the Cayman Islands for the period proposed;\n(b)  a statement in writing, giving the date on which it is proposed that\nthe ward shall leave the Cayman Islands, the period of absence and\nthe whereabouts of the ward during such absence; and, unless\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 184\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\notherwise directed, a written undertaking by the applicant to return\nthe ward to the Cayman Islands at the end of the proposed period\nof absence.\n\nOn compliance with these requirements a certificate, for production to\nthe Department of Immigration, stating that the conditions of the order\nhave been complied with, may be obtained from the Registry.\n\n4. Interviewing the Ward for the Proceedings\n4.1  A ward may be seen by a welfare officer appointed by the court for the\npurposes of preparation of a welfare report, or by that ward\u2019s Guardian\nAd Litem for instructions to an attorney for the purposes of presenting\nthat ward\u2019s case. In those circumstances leave is not required. For an\nindependent reporter (being a person appointed by a party to report to\nthe court) seeking to interview a ward of court, leave of the court must\nbe obtained.\n\n5. Criminal Proceedings\n5.1  Where a child has been interviewed by the police in connection with\ncontemplated criminal proceedings and the child subsequently\nbecomes a ward of court, the permission of the court deciding the\nwardship proceedings (\u201cthe wardship court\u201d) is not required for the\nchild to be called as a witness in the criminal proceedings; provided\nany necessary leave of the trial court is obtained.\n\n5.2  Where the police need to interview a child who is already a ward of\ncourt, an application must , other than in the exceptional cases referred\nto in paragraph 5.5, be made to the wardship court for permission for\nthe police to do so. Where permission is given the order should, unless\nthere is some special reason to the contrary, give permission for any\nnumber of interviews which may be required by the prosecution or the\npolice. If a need arises to conduct any interview beyond the permission\ncontained in the order, a further application must be made.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 185\n\n5.3  The above applications must be made with notice to all parties.\n\n5.4  Where a person may become the subject of a criminal investigation and\nit is considered necessary for the child who is a ward of court to be\ninterviewed without that person knowing that the police are making\ninquiries, the application for permission to interview the child may be\nmade without notice to that party. Notice should, however, where\npracticable be given to the child\u2019s guardian.\n\n5.5 There will be other occasions where the police need to deal with\ncomplaints, or alleged offences, concerning children who are wards of\ncourt where it is appropriate, if not essential, for action to be taken\nstraight away without the prior permission of the wardship court, for\nexample \u2013\n(a)  serious offences against the child such as rape, where a medical\nexamination and the collection of forensic evidence ought to be\ncarried out promptly;\n(b)  where the child is suspected by the police of having committed a\ncriminal act and the police wish to interview the child in respect of\nthat matter;\n(c)  where the police wish to interview the child as a potential witness.\n\n5.6  In such instances, the police should notify the parent or foster parent\nwith whom the child is living or another \u2018appropriate adult\u201911 so that\nthat adult has the opportunity of being present when the police\ninterview the child. Additionally, if practicable the child\u2019s guardian (if\none has been appointed) should be notified and invited to attend the\npolice interview or to nominate a third party to attend on the guardian\u2019s\nbehalf.\n\n1 'appropriate adult' means (i) the parent, guardian or, if the juvenile is in the care of a local authority or voluntary\norganisation, a person representing that authority or organisation; (ii) a social worker of a local authority; (iii)\nfailing these, some other responsible adult aged 18 or over who is not a police officer.\nA person, including a parent or guardian, should not be an appropriate adult if they are: (i) suspected of\ninvolvement in the offence; (ii) the victim; (ii) a witness; or (iv) involved in the investigation\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 186\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nA record of the interview or a copy of any statement made by the child\nshould be supplied to the child's guardian. Where the child has been\ninterviewed without the guardian\u2019s knowledge, the guardian should be\n\ninformed at the earliest opportunity of this fact and (if it be the case)\nthat the police wish to conduct further interviews. The wardship court\nshould be informed of the situation at the earliest possible opportunity\nthereafter by the child's guardian, parent, foster parent (through the\nlocal authority) or other responsible adult.\n\n6. Wards of Court: Disclosure of Evidence\n6.1 In wardship cases, leave must be required to disclose evidential\ndocuments to persons who are not parties, e.g. psychiatrist,\npsychologist and medical experts or any other person. Disclosure\nwithout prior leave may be a contempt of court, and this is nonetheless\nthe case where the purpose of the disclosure is only to obtain advice\nfrom the expert concerned as to whether the relevant expert evidence\nwould be forthcoming or would be helpful to the court.\n\n7. Wards of Court: Psychiatric, Psychological or Medical\nExamination\n7.1 It is a firmly established principle in wardship cases that the ward should\nnot be subjected to psychiatric or psychological examination without\nleave of the court.\n\n7.2 An order for leave should normally be made only if the minor is\nseparately represented and that minor\u2019s representative supports the\napplication or if the application is supported by the Department of\nChildren and Family Services if they have the care or supervision of\nthe ward.\n\n7.3 An order for leave should not normally be made unless there is or is\nsuspected to be a specific and identifiable problem or potential problem\non which the court needs assistance, which can only, or most\nconveniently be provided by a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 15 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 187\n\n7.4  Where the court has given such leave, the costs of the examination and\nreport will normally be allowed on taxation, either inter partes or out\nof the legal aid fund, as appropriate, subject to the taxing officer\u2019s\ndiscretion as to the amount.\n\n7.5  Where no such leave has been obtained, the court may refuse to admit\nthe report in evidence and may direct that the costs of obtaining any\nexamination and report should be disallowed.\n\n7.6  If the necessary parental consent is given there is no need to apply for\nleave to subject a ward to an examination which is purely physical (i.e.\nwhen neither psychiatric nor psychological examination is involved).\nThe termination of a pregnancy (for the protection of the life of the\nward in keeping with section 141 of the Penal Code (as amended and\nrevised), and other form of surgery or invasive procedure or the taking\nof a blood or other bodily sample from the ward will require leave.\n\nDATED this 30th day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 188\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n(GCR O.1, r.12)\nINTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION (INCLUDING 1980 HAGUE\nCONVENTION)\n\nPART 1\n1. Introduction\n1.1  This Practice Direction explains what to do if a child has been brought\nto, or kept in, the Cayman Islands without the permission of anyone\nwho has rights of custody in respect of the child in the country where\nthe child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or\nretention. It also explains what to do if a child has been taken out of, or\nkept out of, the Cayman Islands without the permission of a parent or\nsomeone who has rights of custody in respect of the child. These cases\nare called \u201cinternational child abduction cases\u201d and are dealt with in\nthe Grand Court. This Practice Direction also explains what to do if you\nreceive legal papers claiming that you have abducted a child.\n\n1.2  If you have rights of custody in respect of a child and the child has been\nbrought to the Cayman Islands without your permission, or has been\nbrought here with your permission but the person your child is staying\nwith is refusing to return the child, then you can apply to the Grand\nCourt for an order for the return of the child.\n\n1.3  How you make an application to the Grand Court, what evidence you\nneed to provide and what orders you should ask the court to make are\nall explained in this Practice Direction.\n\n1.4  If your child is under 16 years of age and has been brought to the\nCayman Islands from a country which is a party (a \u201cState party\u201d) to the\n1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 189\n\nAbduction (\u201cthe 1980 Hague Convention\u201d) then you can make an\napplication to the Grand Court for an order under that Convention for\nthe return of your child to the State in which that child was habitually\nresident immediately before being removed or being kept away. This is\nexplained in Part 2 below.\n\n1.5  If your child is over 16 years of age and under 18, or has been brought\nto England or Wales from a country which is not a State party to the\n1980 Hague Convention, then you can make an application for the\nreturn of your child under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court\nwith respect to children. In exercising this jurisdiction over children,\nthe Grand Court will make your child\u2019s welfare its paramount\nconsideration. How to make an application under the inherent\njurisdiction of the Grand Court with respect to children is explained in\nPart 3 below.\n\n1.6  It might be necessary for you to make an urgent application to the court\nif you are not sure where your child is, or you think that there is a risk\nthat the person who is keeping your child away from you might take\nthe child out of the Cayman Islands or hide them away. Part 4 below\nexplains how to make an urgent application to the Grand Court for\norders to protect your child until a final decision can be made about\nreturning the child and also how to ask for help from the police and\ngovernment agencies if you think your child might be taken out of the\ncountry.\n\nPART 2\n\n2. Hague Convention Cases\n2.1  States which are party to the 1980 Hague Convention have agreed to\nreturn children who have been either wrongfully removed from, or\nwrongfully retained away from, the State where they were habitually\n\nresident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention. There\nare very limited exceptions to this obligation.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 190\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.2 \u201cWrongfully removed\u201d or \u201cwrongfully retained\u201d means removed or\nretained in breach of rights of custody in respect of the child attributed\nto a person or a body or an institution. \u201cRights of custody\u201d are\ninterpreted very widely (see paragraph 2.12 below).\n\n2.3  The text of the 1980 Hague Convention and a list of Contracting States\n(that is, State parties) can be found on the website of The Hague\nConference on Private International Law at http:\/\/www.hcch.net. The\nCayman Islands are a party to the Convention.\n\n2.4  In each State party there is a body called the Central Authority whose\nduty is to help people use the 1980 Hague Convention.\n\n2.5  If you think that your child has been brought to, or kept in, the Cayman\nIslands, and your State is a State party to the 1980 Hague Convention,\nthen you should get in touch with your own Central Authority who will\nhelp you to send an application for the return of your child to the\nCentral Authority for Cayman Islands. However, you are not obliged\nto contact your own Central Authority. You may contact the Central\nAuthority for the Cayman Islands directly, or you may simply instruct\nattorneys at law in the Cayman Islands to make an application for you.\n\n2.6  The Central Authority for the Cayman Islands\n\nThe Central Authority for the Cayman Islands is located in the Office\nof the Solicitor General\/Attorney General and its contact details are as\nfollows:\nDMS House\nGenesis Close, George Town\nPO Box 907\nGrand Cayman KY1-1103\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 191\n\nCAYMAN ISLANDS\nTel: (345) 946-0022\nFax: (345) 946-0019\nContact: Suzanne Bothwell\nEmail: Suzanne.Bothwell@gov.ky\n\nIn an emergency (including out of normal working hours) contact\nshould be made with the Grand Court on: (345) 323 0341\n\n2.7  What the Central Authority will do\n\nWhen the Central Authority receives your application for the return of\nyour child, unless you already have a legal representative in the\nCayman Islands whom you want to act for you, it will send your\napplication to an attorney at law whom it knows to be experienced in\ninternational child abduction cases and ask them to take the case for\nyou. You will then be the attorney at law\u2019s client and the attorney at\nlaw will make an application for public funding to meet your legal costs\nif you are unable to pay. The attorney at law will then apply to the\nGrand Court for an order for the return of your child\n\n2.8  Applying to the Grand Court - The Form and Content of Application\n\nAn application to the Grand Court for an order under the 1980 Hague\nConvention must be made in the Registry of the Family Division in\nForm C53 (attached).\n\n2.9  The application must include \u2013\n(a)  the names and dates of birth of the children;\n(b)  the names of the children\u2019s parents or guardians;\n(c)  the whereabouts or suspected whereabouts of the children;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 192\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(d)  the interest of the applicant in the matter (e.g. mother, father, or\nperson with whom the child lives and details of any order placing\nthe child with that person);\n(e)  the reasons for the application;\n(f)  details of any proceedings (including proceedings not in the\nCayman Islands, and including any legal proceedings which have\nfinished) relating to the children;\n(g)  where the application is for the return of a child, the identity of the\nperson alleged to have removed or retained the child and, if\ndifferent, the identity of the person with whom the child is thought\nto be.\n\n2.10 The application should be accompanied by all relevant documents\nincluding (but not limited to) \u2013\n(a) an authenticated copy of any relevant decision or agreement;\n(b) a certificate or an affidavit from a Central Authority, or other\ncompetent authority of the State of the child\u2019s habitual residence,\nor from a qualified person, concerning the relevant law of that\nState.\n2.11As the applicant you may also file a statement in support of the\napplication, although usually your attorney at law will make and file a\nstatement for you on your instructions. The statement must contain and\nbe verified by a statement of truth in the following terms:\n\n\u201cI make this statement knowing that it will be placed before the\ncourt, and I confirm that to the best of my knowledge and belief its\ncontents are true.\u201d\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 193\n\n2.12 Rights of Custody\n\n\u201cRights of custody\u201d includes rights relating to the care of the child and,\nin particular, the right to determine the child\u2019s place of residence.\nRights of custody may arise by operation of law (that is, they are\nconferred on someone automatically by the legal system in which they\n\nare living) or by a judicial or administrative decision or as a result of\nan agreement having legal effect. The rights of a person, an institution\nor any other body are a matter for the law of the State of the child\u2019s\nhabitual residence, but it is for the State which is being asked to return\nthe child to decide: (i) if those rights amount to rights of custody for\nthe purposes of the 1980 Hague Convention; (ii) whether at the time of\nthe removal or retention those rights were actually being exercised; and\n(iii) whether there has been a breach of those rights.\n\n2.13 In the Cayman Islands a father who is not married to the mother of\ntheir child does not necessarily have \u201crights of custody\u201d in respect of\nthe child. An unmarried father in the Cayman Islands who has parental\nresponsibility for a child has rights of custody in respect of that child.\nIn the case of an unmarried father without parental responsibility, the\nconcept of rights of custody may include more than strictly legal rights\nand where immediately before the removal or retention of the child that\nunmarried father was exercising parental functions over a substantial\nperiod of time as the only or main carer for the child that unmarried\nfather may have rights of custody. An unmarried father can ask the\nCentral Authority or that unmarried father\u2019s legal representative for\nadvice on this. It is important to remember that it will be for the State\nwhich is being asked to return the child to decide if the father\u2019s\ncircumstances meet that State\u2019s requirements for the establishment of\nrights of custody.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 194\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.14 Sometimes, court orders impose restrictions on the removal of children\nfrom the country in which they are living. These can be orders under\nthe Children Act (as amended and revised) (\u201csection 10\u201d orders) or\norders under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court (sometimes\ncalled \u201cinjunctions\u201d). Any removal of a child in breach of an order\nimposing such a restriction would be wrongful under the 1980 Hague\nConvention.\n\n2.15 The fact that court proceedings are in progress about a child, does not\nof itself give rise to a prohibition on the removal of the child by a parent\nwith sole parental responsibility unless:\n\n(a)  the proceedings are Wardship proceedings in the Cayman Islands\n(in which case removal would breach the rights of custody\nattributed to the Grand Court and fathers with no custody rights\ncould rely on that breach); or\n(b)  the court is actually considering the custody of the child, because\nthen the court itself would have rights of custody.\n\nDefending Abduction Proceedings\n2.16 If you are served with an application - whether it is under the 1980\nHague or the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court - you must not\ndelay. You must obey any directions given in any order with which you\nhave been served, and you should seek legal advice at the earliest\npossible opportunity, although neither you nor the child concerned will\nautomatically be entitled to legal aid.\n\n2.17 It is particularly important that you tell the court where the child is,\nbecause the child will not be permitted to live anywhere else without\nthe permission of the court, or to leave the Cayman Islands, until the\nproceedings are finished.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 195\n\n2.18 It is also particularly important that you present to the court any\ndefence to the application which you or the child might want to make\nat the earliest possible opportunity, although the orders with which you\nwill have been served are likely to tell you the time by which you will\nhave to do this.\n\n2.19 If the child concerned objects to any order sought in relation to them,\nand if the child is of an age and understanding at which the court will\ntake account of their views, the court is likely to direct that the child is\nseen by an officer of the Department of Children and Family Services.\n\nYou should cooperate in this process. Children are not usually made\nparties to abduction cases, but in certain exceptional circumstances the\ncourt can make them parties so that they have their own separate legal\nrepresentation. These are all matters about which you should seek legal\nadvice.\n\nPART 3\n\n3. Non-Convention Cases\n3.1  Applications for the return of children wrongfully removed or retained\naway from States which are not parties to the 1980 Hague Convention\nor in respect of children to whom that Convention does not apply, can\nbe made to the Grand Court under its inherent jurisdiction with respect\nto children. Such proceedings are referred to as \u201cnon-Convention\u201d\ncases. In proceedings under the inherent jurisdiction of the Grand Court\nwith respect to children, the child\u2019s welfare is the court\u2019s paramount\nconsideration. The extent of the court\u2019s enquiry into the child\u2019s welfare\nwill depend on the circumstances of the case; in some cases the child\u2019s\nwelfare will be best served by a summary hearing and, if necessary, a\nprompt return to the State from which the child has been removed or\nretained. In other cases a more detailed enquiry may be necessary (see:\nRe J (Child Returned Abroad: Convention Rights) [2005] UKHL 40;\n[2005] 2 FLR 802).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 16 OF 2014\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 196\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.2  Every application for the return of a child under the inherent\njurisdiction must be made in the Registry of the Family Division and\nheard in the Grand Court.\n\n3.3 The Form and Content of the Application\n\nAn application for the return of a child under the inherent jurisdiction\nmust be made in Form C54 (attached) and must include the information\nin paragraph 2.9 above.\n\n3.4 You must file a statement in support of your application, which must\nexhibit all the relevant documents. The statement must contain and be\nverified by a statement of truth in the following terms:\n\u201cI make this statement knowing that it will be placed before the\ncourt, and confirm that to the best of my knowledge and belief its\ncontents are true.\u201d\n\nPART 4\n\n4. General Provisions\n4.1  When a child has been abducted and a judge considers that publicity\nmay help in tracing the child, the judge may adjourn the case for a short\nperiod to enable representatives of the Press to give the case the widest\npossible publicity.\n\nDATED this 30th day of May 2014\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, QC\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 197\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512 (as\namended and revised)\nApplications for Sealing Orders and for inspection of Court Files in\nCivil Proceedings Grand Court Rules Order 63 r 3\n\nThe current provisions of Order 63 provide for a Register of Judgments and\na Register of Writs and Other Originating Process which are open for\ninspection by the public (O. 63 rules 7 and 8). The balance of a Court file is\nopen to inspection only by the parties: O. 63 r. 3(3); although a non-party\nmay apply for inspection pursuant to O. 63 r. 3(5) (see below). A judge of\nthe Court may order that all or part of a Court file may be sealed and\ntherefore not open to inspection by anyone without leave of the Court: O.\n63 r. 3(4). Such leave is granted upon application by any person who is not\na party: O. 63 r. 3(5). Order 63 has no application to matrimonial, probate,\nwinding up or bankruptcy proceedings, all of which are governed by their\nown rules.\n\nIn furtherance of the rules, the following practice shall apply:\n\nAn application under O. 63 r. 3(4) to seal all or part of a Court file may be\nmade to the Court or by letter to the Clerk of the Court and may be\ndetermined by a Judge administratively. An application to the Clerk of\nCourt will be referred to a Judge with or without recommendation by the\nClerk of Court. The application should contain:\n\n1.  the identity of the applicant;\n2.  a concise statement of the reason for the request;\n\n7 To be read with Practice Direction on Publication of Chambers Proceedings; 1997 CILR Note I.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512\n(as amended and revised)\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 198\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.  a description of the portion of the Court file to be sealed, which should\nbe no broader than is necessary to protect the privacy interest in\nquestion; and\n\n4.  a statement of the duration for which the order is required, which\nshould be no longer than is necessary to protect the privacy interest in\nquestion.\n\nA sealing order under O. 63 r. 3(4) may be made by a Judge of the Court on\nthat Judge\u2019s own motion if that Judge is satisfied that such an order is\nnecessary in the interests of justice.\n\nWhere a file has been ordered to be closed, the Clerk of Court shall ensure\nthat the file, both in its documented version and electronic version, is\nappropriately marked as sealed and access is restricted. The Judicial\nEnforcement Management System (JEMS) will be programmed to ensure\nthat the sealed electronic files are not accessible except to certain levels of\nstaff without leave of the court; such access to be granted after the Clerk of\nCourt has obtained leave from a Judge.\n\nWhere a sealing order has been made by a Judge, the successful applicant\nmust provide:\n\n1.  A cover letter addressed to the Clerk of Court advising that such an\norder has been made;\n\n2.  Sufficient copies of the documents to be sealed; and\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 199\n\n3.  A fully endorsed cover sheet for an envelope of a type to be provided\nby the Registry, setting out the file number, names of the parties, the\ndate and duration of the sealing order, and listing the contents of the\nenvelope.\n\nThe Civil Registry will contact counsel to fix a date and time for the file (or\ndocuments) to be sealed in the presence of counsel or that counsel\u2019s\nrepresentative. The envelope will be date stamped and endorsed with the\nnames of the persons present.\n\nApplication for inspection of Court Files\nAn application under O. 63 r. 3(5) for leave to inspect a Court file may be\nmade by letter to the Clerk of the Court and may be determined\nadministratively by the Clerk of Court unless the Clerk is of the view that\nthe matter should be referred to a Judge for determination. The application\nshould contain:\n\n1)  The identity of the person seeking leave to inspect and, where that\nperson is an attorney or agent, the identity of that person\u2019s principal.\nWhere the person applying is an agent, written authority of the principal\nmust be furnished.\n\n2)  A concise statement of the reason for the request; and\n\n3)  A description of the portion of the Court file that the applicant wishes\nto inspect.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 1 OF 201512\n(as amended and revised)\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 200\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nApplication for inspection of a sealed file13\n1.  An application under O. 63 r. 3(5) for leave to inspect a file which has\nbeen sealed by order of the court must be made in writing to the Clerk\nof Court and notified to the party or parties who obtained closure of the\nfile.\n\n2.  Any objection to inspection and reasons therefor shall be submitted in\nwriting to the Clerk of the Court by no later than 3:00 pm on the fifth\nday following receipt of notice of the application, for consideration by\nthe Judge who made the sealing order (or, in that Judge\u2019s absence,\nanother Judge).\n\n3.  The application and any objection shall immediately be submitted by\nthe Clerk of Court for consideration by the judge.\n\nAll orders made under O. 63 rules 3(4) and (5) shall be endorsed on the\ncover of the file.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nFebruary 20 2015\n(Amended on the 13th July 2015)\n\n1 This direction was added upon the advice of the Court of Appeal given in Civil Appeal No. 23 of 2014, Cause\nFSD 96 of 2014 (AJJ), Sasken Communications Technologies Limited and Spreadrum Communications Inc.,\ntranscript of written judgment delivered 10th May 2015.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 201\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015\nApplications for inspection of Criminal Court Files Section 193 of the\nCriminal Procedure Code\n\nSection 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code\nWhere a person applies for inspection of a Criminal Court File pursuant to\nsection 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as amended and revised) as a\n\u2018person affected\u2019, that person shall explain and provide proof of the basis\nupon which that person applies as a person affected.\n\nThe Clerk of Court, if satisfied that the person is applying as a person\naffected, may provide the document or record requested in keeping with\nsection 193, provided that the document or record is not of a class in respect\nof which inspection has been otherwise curtailed by order of the Court or\nby this Practice Direction.\n\nApplications for inspection other than under section 193 of the Criminal\nProcedure Code\nAn application for leave to inspect a Criminal Court file may be made by\nletter to the Clerk of the Court and may be determined administratively by\nthe Clerk of Court unless the Clerk is of the view that the matter should be\nreferred to a Judge for determination. The application should contain:\n\n1.  The identity of the person seeking leave to inspect and, where that\nperson is an attorney or agent, the identity of that person\u2019s principal.\nWhere the person applying is an agent, written authority of the principal\nmust be furnished. Where the person applying is a guardian, parent or\nperson in loco parentis, proof of the relationship must be furnished.\n\n2.  A concise statement of the reason for the request; and\n\n3.  A description of the portion of the Court file that the applicant wishes\nto inspect.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 2 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 202\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nThe following documents will not be open to inspection unless ordered by\na Judge:\n1.  Public Interest Immunity material, so deemed by order of the court.\n2.  Witness Statements involving the evidence of witnesses in sensitive\ncases.14\n3.  A document which was sealed by the Court during the trial or other\nstage of the criminal proceedings.\n4.  Letters or other communication presented to the Judge for\nconsideration but not adduced into evidence,\n5.  Any other document that is not in the public domain (for example:\nPsychiatric or Probation reports)\n6.  Files relating to sexual offence cases.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nFebruary 20 2015\n\n1 For the purpose of this Practice Direction, sensitive cases are defined as cases involving firearms offences,\nsexual offences, or cases involving witnesses in protection or in respect of whom anonymity orders have been\nmade.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 3 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 203\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 3 OF 2015\n(GCR O. 96, r. 3(5))\nLIST OF APPROVED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS\nThis is the list of independent real estate appraisers currently approved by the\nGrand Court Rules Committee (the \"Rules Committee\") pursuant to GCR\nOrder 96, rule 3(5). In compiling this list the Rules Committee has adopted the\ncriteria for inclusion in the Cayman Islands Government Valuation Panel\ncompiled by the Valuations and Estates Office of the Cayman Islands\nGovernment.\n\nThe Valuations and Estates Office has certified that the firms listed below meet\nthe minimum professional qualification and experience criteria for\nappointment to the Cayman Islands Government Valuation Panel and are\nhereby approved by the Rules Committee pursuant to GCR Order 96, rule 3(5):\n\n\uf0b7\nBCQS International\n\uf0b7\nBlue Point Consultants Ltd.\n\uf0b7\nBould Consulting Ltd.\n\uf0b7\nCharterland Ltd.\n\uf0b7\nDDL Studio\n\uf0b7\nIntegra Realty Resources \u2013 Caribbean\n\uf0b7\nJEC Property Consultants Ltd.\n\nIn each case the appraisal is to be completed or countersigned by an appraiser\nwho has attained the Chartered Valuation Surveyor professional designation\nfrom the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.\n\nIssued by the Grand Court Rules Committee on the 9th day of July 2015.\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C., Chief Justice\nThe Hon. Samuel Bulgin, Q.C., Attorney General\nColin D. McKie, Q.C., Legal Practitioner\nHector Robinson, Legal Practitioner\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 204\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\n(GCR O. 1, r. 12)\nWITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS (GCR O. 38 AND O. 41)\nTAKING EVIDENCE FROM WITNESSES, AFFIANTS AND\nDEPONENTS WHO DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH\n\n1.  If a witness or affiant or deponent (a \"Witness\") is not capable of\nreading or speaking English then a witness statement or affidavit or\ndeposition (a \"Statement\") from that person must be prepared in that\nperson\u2019s native language before being translated into English. Where\nthe Statement is in a foreign language \u2013\n(1)  the party wishing to rely on it must \u2013\n(a) have it translated into English; and\n(b) file the foreign language Statement at the Court and serve it on\nthe other parties; and\n(2)  the translator must swear an affidavit certifying that the exhibited\ntranslation is a faithful and accurate translation into English.\n2.  There must be clarity about the process by which a Statement in a\nforeign language has been created. In all cases, the Statement should\ncontain an explanation of the process by which it has been taken: for\nexample, face-to-face, over the telephone, by Skype\/video-link, or\nbased on a document written in the Witness' native language.\n\nIf an attorney has been instructed by the party, that attorney should be\nfully involved in the process described above and should not defer or\ndelegate it to that attorney\u2019s client.\n3.  If an attorney is presented with a Statement in English from a witness\nwhom the attorney is not reasonably satisfied is able to read, speak and\ntestify in English, the attorney should question its provenance and not\nsimply seek to adduce the document as a proof of evidence.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 205\n\n4.  The Witness should be spoken to wherever possible, using an\ninterpreter, and a draft Statement should be prepared in the native\nlanguage for the Witness to read and sign and for the interpreter to read.\nIf the attorney is fluent in the foreign language then it is permissible for\nthat attorney to act in the role of the interpreter. However, this must be\nmade clear either within the body of the Statement or in a separate\naffidavit from the attorney (in that attorney\u2019s role as interpreter).\n5.  A litigant in person should where possible use an interpreter when\npreparing a Statement.\n6.  If the Witness is not able to read or write in their own native language,\nthe interpreter must carefully read the Statement to the Witness in that\nWitness\u2019s own native language and set out the fact that the interpreter\nhas done so in the translator's jurat or affidavit, using the words\nprovided in Annex 1 or 2.\n7.  Once the witness has completed that witness\u2019s Statement in that\nwitness\u2019s native language and signed it, the Statement should be\ntranslated by a translator who must then either: sign a jurat confirming\nthat the translation is a faithful and accurate translation of the\nStatement; or provide a short affidavit to the same effect.\n8.  If a Witness is to testify either in person or by video-link, a copy of the\noriginal Statement in that Witness\u2019s native language and the English\ntranslation thereof must be provided to the Witness well in advance of\nthe hearing.\n9.  If a deposition or other Statement has been obtained and prepared\nabroad in compliance with the relevant country's laws, a translation of\nthat deposition or other Statement must be filed at Court and served on\nthe other parties together with the original document.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 206\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n10.  If a party files and serves a Statement in English (not being a translation\ninto English) then the Court will be entitled to presume that this is a\nrepresentation from that party and that party\u2019s attorney to the Court and\nto the other parties that the Witness is fluent in English and that the\nWitness is willing and able to testify in English. In the event that the\nCourt is subsequently satisfied that the Witness is not willing or able to\ntestify in English, the Court will make such case-management orders\nas it sees fit, including, without limitation:\n(1)  Whether or not the party is to be permitted to rely on the Statement;\n(2)  Whether or not the party is to be permitted to adduce a new\nStatement from the Witness in a foreign language in compliance\nwith the terms of this Practice Direction;\n(3)  Whether or not to adjourn any hearing and, if so, whether a court\ntranslator will be required to attend the adjourned hearing;\n(4)  Whether or not the party should bear the costs thrown away and, if\nso, whether those costs should be on the standard basis or\nindemnity basis; and\n(5)  Whether or not a wasted costs order should be made against the\nparty's attorney.\n11. This Practice Direction applies to all Divisions of the Grand Court\nexcept the Criminal Division. Practice Direction No 8 of 2014 (Taking\nevidence from non-English speakers in the Family Division of the\nGrand Court) is hereby revoked.\n\nDated this 9th day of July 2015\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 207\n\nAnnex 1\n\nCertificate to be used where an affiant is unable to read or sign an affidavit\nwritten in that affiant\u2019s native language.\nSworn at \u2026 [place]\nthis \u2026 day of \u2026 20..\nBefore me,\n[and either]\nI having first read over the contents of this affidavit to the affiant [if\nthere are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect\nof the exhibits referred to in it], who appeared to understand it and\napproved its content as true and accurate, and signed\/made* his\/her*\nmark on the affidavit in my presence.\n\n[Name and signature of notary or other person authorised to\nadminister oath where affidavit sworn]\n\n[or]\nthe witness to the mark of the affiant having been first sworn that the\nwitness had read over the contents of this affidavit to the affiant [if\nthere are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect\nof the exhibits referred to in it], who appeared to understand it and\napproved its content as true and accurate, and that the witness saw the\naffiant sign\/make* his\/her* mark on the affidavit.\n\n[Name and signature of witness.]\n\n[Name and signature of notary or other person authorised to\nadminister oath where affidavit sworn]\n\n* delete as appropriate\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No 4 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 208\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nAnnex 2\n\nCertificate to be used where a witness is unable to read or sign a witness\nstatement written in that witness\u2019s native language.\n\nI certify that I [name and address of authorised person] have read over the\ncontents of this witness statement and the statement of truth to the witness\n[if there are exhibits, add the words and explained the nature and effect of\nthe exhibits referred to in it] who (a) appeared to understand the witness\nstatement and approved its content as true and accurate and (b) appeared\nto understand the statement of truth and the consequences of making a\nfalse witness statement, and signed\/made* his\/her mark* in my presence.\n\n[Signature of witness.]\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 209\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nCAYMAN ISLANDS SUMMARY COURT - CRIMINAL CASE\nMANAGEMENT\n1. Purpose\n1.1 The purpose of this Practice Direction is to establish a procedure for\ncase management in criminal proceedings in the Summary Court to\nreduce delays and improve efficiency.\n2. Context\n2.1 In this Practice Direction:\n2.1.1 \u201cCourt\u201d means the Summary Court.\n3. The Overriding Objective\n3.1  The overriding objective of this Practice Direction is that criminal cases\nbe dealt with justly and expeditiously.\n3.2  Dealing with a case in furtherance of the overriding objective\nincludes \u2013\n(i)  Acquitting the innocent and convicting the guilty;\n(ii)  Dealing with the Prosecution and the Defence fairly;\n(iii) Recognising the fundamental rights and freedoms protected by the\nConstitution of the Cayman Islands.\n(iv)  Respecting the interests of witnesses, victims and keeping them\ninformed of the progress of the case;\n(v)  Dealing with the case efficiently and expeditiously;\n(vi)  Dealing with cases in ways that take into account \u2013\n(a)  The gravity of the offence alleged;\n(b)  The complexity of what is in issue;\n(c)  The severity of the consequences for the defendant and others\naffected; and\n(d)  The needs of other cases.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 210\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n4. The duty of the parties in a criminal case\n4.1  Each of the parties, in the conduct of each case, must:\n(i)  Prepare and conduct the case in accordance with the overriding\nobjective;\n(ii)  Comply with Practice Directions and directions made by the Court\nincluding times set within which actions must be taken either under\nthis Practice Direction or by rules of the court; and\n(iii) At once inform the Court and all parties of any significant failure\n(whether or not that participant is responsible for that failure) to\ntake any procedural step required by this Practice Direction or any\ndirection of the Court;\n4.2.1 A failure is significant if it might hinder the Court in furthering the\noverriding objective.\n4.2.2 Anyone involved in any way with a criminal case is a participant in\nits conduct for the purposes of this Practice Direction.\n5. The application by the Court of the overriding objective\n5.1 The Court must further the overriding objective in particular when\nexercising any power given to it by legislation, applying any Practice\nDirection, or interpreting any Practice Direction.\n6. The duty of the Court\n6.1  The Court must further the overriding objective by actively managing\nthe case. Active case management includes:\n (i)  The early identification of the real issues;\n(ii)  The early identification of the needs of the witnesses;\n(iii) Achieving certainty as to what must be done, by whom, and when,\nin particular by the early setting of a timetable for the progress of\nthe case;\n(iv) Monitoring the progress of the case and compliance with\ndirections;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 211\n\n(v)  Ensuring that evidence, whether disputed or not, is presented in the\nshortest and clearest way;\n(vi) Discouraging delay, dealing with as many aspects of the case as\npossible on the same occasion, and avoiding unnecessary hearings;\n(vii) Encouraging the participants to co-operate in the progression of\nthe case; and\n(viii) Making use of technology as appropriate and available.\n6.2 The Court must actively manage the case by giving any direction\nappropriate to the needs of that case as early as possible.\n7. The duty of the parties\n7.1 Each party must actively assist the Court in fulfilling its duty under\nparagraph 6.1, with or without a direction - and apply for a direction if\nneeded to further the overriding objective.\n8. The Court\u2019s case management powers\n8.1  In fulfilling its duty under paragraph 6, the Court may give any\ndirection and take any step to actively manage a case unless that\ndirection or step would be inconsistent with legislation, or this Practice\nDirection.\n8.2  In particular the Court may:\n(i)  Direct that preliminary issues, such as admissibility of evidence,\nare determined at a hearing before the trial;\n(ii)  Nominate a Magistrate to manage a case;\n(iii)  Give a direction on its own initiative or on application by a party;\n(iv)  Ask or allow a party to propose a direction;\n(v) For the purpose of giving directions, the Court will receive\napplications and representations by letter, by telephone or by any\nother means of electronic communication, and conduct a hearing\nby such means;\n8.3  Give a direction:\n(i)  At a hearing, in public or in private, or\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 212\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(ii) Without a hearing\n(iii) Fix, postpone, bring forward, extend, cancel or adjourn a hearing;\n8.4  Shorten or extend (even after it has expired) a time limit fixed by a\ndirection;\n8.5 Require that issues in the case should be:\n(i)  Identified in writing,\n(ii) Determined separately, and decide in what order they will be\ndetermined; and\n(iii) Specify the consequences of failing to comply with a direction.\n8.6  Any power to give a direction under this Practice Direction includes a\npower to vary or revoke that direction.\n8.7  If a party fails to comply with a rule or direction, the Court may:\n(i)  Fix, postpone, bring forward, extend, cancel or adjourn a hearing;\n(ii)  Exercise its powers to make a costs order; and\/or\n(iii) Impose such other sanction as may be appropriate.\n9. Case preparation and progression\n9.1  At every hearing, if a case cannot be concluded there and then, the\nCourt must give directions so that it can be concluded at the next\nhearing or as soon as possible after that.\n9.2  At every hearing the Court must, where relevant:\n(i)  Take the defendant's plea (unless already done) or, if no plea can\nbe taken, find out whether the defendant is likely to plead guilty or\nnot guilty;\n(ii)  Set, follow or revise a timetable for the progress of the case, which\nmay include a timetable for any hearing including the trial;\n(iii)  Where a direction has not been complied with, find out why,\nidentify who was responsible, and take appropriate action.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 213\n\n9.3  In order to prepare for the trial, the Court must take every reasonable\nstep, to encourage and to facilitate the attendance of witnesses when\nthey are needed; and to facilitate the participation of any person,\nincluding the defendant.\n10. Conduct of a trial and ancillary proceedings\n10.1 In order to manage a trial and any ancillary proceedings, such as\nconfiscation, the Court:\n10.1.1 Must establish, with the active assistance of the parties, what are\nthe disputed issues;\n10.1.2 Must consider setting a timetable:\n(i)  That takes account of those issues and of any timetable\nproposed by a party; and\n(ii)  May limit the duration of any stage of the hearing;\n10.1.3 May require a party to identify:\n(i)  Which witnesses that party wants to give evidence in person;\n(ii)  The order in which that party wants those witnesses to give\ntheir evidence;\n(iii) Whether that party requires an order compelling attendance of\na witness;\n(iv) What arrangements are desirable to facilitate the giving of\nevidence by a witness;\n(v)  What arrangements are desirable to facilitate the participation\nof any other person, including the defendant;\n(vi)  What written evidence that party intends to introduce;\n(vii) What other material, if any, that person intends to make\navailable to the Court in the presentation of the case; and\n(viii) Whether that party intends to raise any point of law that could\naffect the conduct of the trial or ancillary application; and\n10.1.4 May limit:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 214\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(i)  The examination, cross-examination or re-examination of a\nwitness; and\n(ii) The duration of any stage of the hearing.\n10.1.5. The Case Management Form issued with this Practice Direction\nshall be completed (in the case of a represented defendant) by the\nDefence and Prosecution counsel and in the case of an\nunrepresented defendant by the presiding Magistrate with the\nassistance of the Prosecution Counsel.\n11. TIME LIMITS\nNote: The directions in this Part set down the maximum time-limits within\nwhich it is desirable that every case should be disposed of. Every effort must\nstill be made to dispose of cases as soon as reasonably practicable, which in\nsome cases will result in a substantially quicker disposal. The directions in\nthis part do not apply to proceedings which are before the Drug Treatment\nCourt or other diversionary programmes.\nTimeframe for the completion of proceedings: summary matters\n11.1 (i)  Every matter to be tried before the Summary Court should aim to\nbe concluded within a period not exceeding 12 months from the\ndate of the First Hearing.\n(ii)  In the event of conviction, the defendant should be sentenced by\nthe Court before which the defendant was convicted within a\nperiod not exceeding 56 days from the date of conviction, save\nonly in the case of exceptional circumstances.\nCustody Cases\n11.2 In the event that a defendant is remanded to custody, that defendant\u2019s\ntrial shall be concluded:\n(i)  In the case of a matter triable in the Summary Court, within a\nperiod not exceeding 9 months, unless there are exceptional\ncircumstances, from the date of the first hearing.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 215\n\n12. ADJOURNMENTS\nCriteria for Grant of Adjournment\n12.1 Adjournments shall be granted only if the Court is satisfied that:\n(i)  There is good cause for an adjournment; and\n(ii)  An adjournment is necessary in meeting the interests of justice.\n12.2 (i)  Where there have been two or more adjournments for the same\nreason(s), the Court shall only grant a further adjournment if\nexceptional circumstances are shown.\n(ii)  Case involving defendants in custody and cases in which the trial\nhas already been adjourned must not be adjourned unless\nexceptional circumstances can be shown to the satisfaction of the\nCourt.\n(iii) Once a trial has been commenced, an adjournment shall only be\ngranted where the grounds for the application could not reasonably\nhave been known at the time the trial started or where there are\nexceptional reasons for justifying the delay.\n12.3 Applications for an adjournment should be rigorously scrutinised, in\nparticular, the following factors to be taken into consideration:\n(i)  Summary justice should be speedy justice;\n(ii)  The more serious the charge, the more the public interest demands\nthat a trial take place;\n(iv)  The age of the complainant and any other significant witnesses;\n(v)  Whether or not the refusal of an adjournment would compromise\nthe defendant\u2019s ability to fully present that defendant\u2019s defence;\nand\n(vi) The history of adjournments, at whose request any previous\nadjournments have been made and the reasons provided.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 216\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nNote:\n1.  The overriding objective of this Practice Direction is the just and\nexpeditious disposal of cases. This cannot be achieved by the Court\nreadily granting adjournments without good cause being shown.\nParticular care is required in respect of applications that are made once\na trial has been commenced and the general presumption in such cases\nshould always be against an adjournment being granted.\n2.\nThis Part applies equally to cases in which a defendant\u2019s attorney has\nfailed to attend. An attorney is obliged to notify the Court immediately\nshould they become aware of a conflicting fixture. A defendant is not\nentitled to repeated adjournments to secure the right to legal\nrepresentation: R v Robinson (1985) 32 WIR 330, PC. The overriding\nconsideration must be the requirements of justice, for both the\nProsecution and the defence; R v De Oliveira [1997] Crim L.R. 600.\n13. PROCEDURAL STAGES and TIMETABLE: SUMMARY\nCOURT\nThe First Hearing\n13.1 (i) The First Hearing in each case shall be conducted by a Magistrate.\n(ii)  At the First Hearing the following should occur, where practicable\nand without hampering the disposal of the weekly Mentions List:\n(a)  verification of the defendant\u2019s identity, current address and\ncontact details;\n(b)  if the defendant is, or intends to be represented, details of\nrepresentation shall be provided;\n(c)  if the defendant is not represented any intention or request on\nthe part of the defendant that that defendant will be legally\nrepresented shall be recorded;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 217\n\n(d)  an unrepresented defendant should be given an explanation of\nthat defendant\u2019s rights, including, where appropriate, the right\nto:\n(i)  bail;\n(ii)  silence, save in respect of confirmation of that\ndefendant\u2019s name and contact details;\n(iii) a trial;\n(iv) an interpreter; and\n(e)  consideration of bail for unrepresented defendants in custody\nand any application for represented defendants, shall be taken\n(or adjourned to next earliest date);\n(iii) oral notification shall be given to the defendant of the date for the\nnext hearing.\nSecond Hearings\n13.2 (i)  For summary only matters, every defendant shall be required to\nenter a plea at the second hearing and a trial date shall be set if a\nnot guilty plea is entered.\n(ii)  For either way matters, the defendant shall be required to enter a\nplea at the second hearing if the court determines that it is to be\ntried summarily.\n(iii) For indictable matters not yet committed for trial in the Grand\nCourt, the defendant shall be asked whether or not the defendant\nwishes to indicate a plea at the start of every hearing in the\nSummary Court.\nVenue Hearing\n13.3 (i)  A Venue Hearing shall only take place in either way cases.\n(ii)  Venue Hearings are to be conducted by a Magistrate and, wherever\npossible, this should be done at the same time as the First Hearing.\n(iii) The purpose of the Venue Hearing is to determine whether the\nmatter should be tried or sentenced, as appropriate taking into\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 218\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\naccount any plea indication, in the Summary Court or the Grand\nCourt.\nAccepting Guilty pleas\n13.4 (i)  Where a defendant is represented, before accepting a plea of guilty\nto any or all of the charges, the Magistrates must satisfy themselves\n(either by questioning the defendant personally or by calling upon\ncounsel to confirm the position or to lead the questioning), that the\ndefendant acknowledges guilt; that the plea is entered voluntarily\nand that it is made with an appropriate understanding of the\nconsequences.\n(ii) Where a defendant is unrepresented, before accepting a plea of\nguilty to any or all of the charges, the Magistrates must satisfy\nthemselves by enquiring of the defendant that the defendant\nacknowledges guilt and enters the plea voluntarily with an\nappropriate understanding of the consequences.\n(iii)  A Magistrate may refuse to accept any plea of guilty if the\nMagistrate is not satisfied that any of the conditions set out in subRule (i) above are not met and\/or that it is not in the interests of\njustice to do so.\n(iv)  If a plea of guilty is not accepted, the fact of the guilty plea having\nbeen given shall not be admissible as evidence of that person\u2019s\nguilt in any subsequent trial in respect of that alleged offence.\n13.5 If the defendant is prepared to plead guilty to alternative offences from\nthe one(s) with which the defendant has been charged, the defendant\nshall inform the Prosecution and the court upon arraignment.\n13.6Where the prosecutor requires an adjournment to consult with the\nOffice of the Director of Public Prosecutions before accepting a plea to\nan alternative offence, the Court shall list the case for a hearing to take\nplace in no later than 28 days.\nNotes:\nWhen accepting a guilty plea, the court must enquire whether that plea\nwas offered by the defendant at an earlier stage in the proceedings. If\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 219\n\nso, the Prosecution must explain why it was not reasonable for that offer\nto have been accepted before.\nPreliminary Inquiries\n13.7 (i) The defence shall notify the Prosecution if the Preliminary Inquiry\nis to be contested at least 7 days before it is due to be heard;\n14. Effective Date\n14.1 This Practice Direction shall come into effect on the 1st day of\nSeptember 2015.\nDated this 29th day of July 2015\n\nThe Hon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 220\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 221\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2015\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 222\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n6. Signatures\n\nFirst Hearing:\n  Date:\nMagistrate\nCase Management Hearing:\n   Date:\nMagistrate\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 223\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n(GCR O.1, R.12)\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION - PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE\nCOMMENCEMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES\nPROCEEDINGS\n\n1. Appointment of Registrar of the FSD\n1.1 With effect from February 2016, Mrs. Shiona Allenger, the Registrar\nof the FSD (appointed pursuant to Rule 2(1) of the Grand Court\n(Amendment)  Rules 2009) on a full time basis.\n1.2 All communications with the Registrar should be \u2014\n(a) by hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor, Kirk House; or\n(b) by e-mail addressed to shiona.allenger@judicial.ky; or\n(c) by telephone  244 3808.\n2. Assignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD\n2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting in conjunction  with  the\nChief Justice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined\nin GCR O.72, r.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the\nproceeding is commenced.\n2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner\/plaintiff's attorney to provide\nthe Registrar with any and all information which appears to that\nattorney to be relevant in determining which judge should be assigned\nto the matter. For example \u2014\n(a) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be appropriate for\ntwo or more related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this\nfact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter\ndelivered with the originating process; or\n(b) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be inappropriate\nfor a matter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 224\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nreason, this fact should be drawn to the attention of the Registrar\nin a letter delivered with the originating process.\n2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will \u2014\n(a) notify the parties' attorneys; and\n(b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge .\n2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned\njudge on the next business day following the day on which the\noriginating process is filed at the FSD Registry.\n2.5 The Registrar will ensure that the docket of the financial services\nproceedings assigned to each Judge of the FSD is kept up to date and\ncirculated weekly to the Chief Justice.\n2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.5, r. 1(7) requires that the initials\nof the assigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part\nof the cause number. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must\nbe included as part of the cause number as it appears in all pleadings,\naffidavits and orders.\n3.\nProcedure for listing hearings\n3.1 The Registrar is responsible, pursuant to GCR O.  72, r.5, for listing the\nhearing of all matters pending in the FSD.\n3.2 With effect from 15th February 2016, all communications relating to\nthe listing of the hearing of any FSD matter shall be addressed to the\nRegistrar who will consult with the Grand Court Listing Officer.\n3.3 For the purpose of this Practice Direction the expression \"hearing\" shall\ninclude summonses for directions, case management conferences\n(\"CMCs\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference\ncalls), interlocutory applications and trials.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 225\n\n3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has\nbeen assigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to\nreview the Court file.\n3.5 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to the FSD.\n3.6 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the\navailability of judges, the Registrar of the FSD and Listing Officer are\nnot authorised to fix any hearing date without the prior approval of the\nassigned judge.  If  the assigned judge is not already familiar with the\nissues or cannot readily ascertain the issues relevant to the proposed\nhearing by reviewing the Court  file,  the parties may be required to\nproduce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72,\nr.4(3).\n3.7 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned\njudge in consultation with the Registrar and Listing Officer, will\nnormally fix the hearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions\nor at a CMC in which all parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel)\nwill be required to participate.\n3.8 The Registrar will publish a monthly list (on the 1st of each month) of\nhearings scheduled in the FSD for the ensuing month.\n4. Listing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions\n4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for\nreducing the share capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies\nAct (as amended and revised)) the petitioner's attorney is required\n(pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6) to issue a summons for directions at the\nsame time as presenting the petition.\n4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the\nproposed order for directions including the timetable for the company\nmeeting(s) and court hearing(s), together with a covering letter which\nexplains whether and, if so, why the matter is particularly time\nsensitive.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 226\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the\nassigned Judge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be\ndispensed with under s.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional\ncase where settlement of a list of creditors is required under s.15(2),\nand the materials filed do not disclose any other reason for the assigned\njudge to require additional evidence or submissions, then that Judge\nmay make an order for directions without the need for a hearing. In all\nother cases that Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing in\nchambers.\n5.\nListing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders\nunder s.124.\n5.1 Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of\nthe Companies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made\nwithout the need for any  hearing  (pursuant to CWR O.15 , r.5(1).)\n5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which\nfurther evidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may\nconvene a CMC or (in consultation with the Registrar) direct the\nListing Officer to fix a date for hearing the petition in open court.\n6.\nApplications for an order that a company be restored to the\nRegister\n6.1 With effect from Monday 27th September 2010 applications made by\na company or one of its members, which are governed by GCR  O.102,\nr.17, are determined by the Registrar of the FSD rather than the Clerk\nof the Court and Form Nos. 66 and 67 should be amended accordingly.\n6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17(6)(c), that an\napplication ought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the\nRegistrar will -\n(a) assign the application to a judge of the FSD;\n(b) fix a hearing date; and\n(c) give notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 227\n\n6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102,\nr.18, will continue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD.\n6.4 At the same time as assigning a creditor's application to a judge of the\nFSD, the Registrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to\nadvertise the petition and give other creditors an opportunity to be\nheard, the hearing will be fixed on a date not less than 21 days or more\nthat 28 days after the date on which the petition is presented.\n7. Applications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred\n7.1 An application by an official liquidator or officeholder for a direction,\npursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and\nrevised), that payment of court fees be deferred must be made to the\nassigned judge.\n7.2 Such applications should be made by letter signed by the official\nliquidator or officeholder personally, addressed to the assigned judge\nand sent to the Registrar.\n7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned Judge and that\nJudge\u2019s decision will be communicated to the applicant and the\nRegistrar by the judge's personal assistant.\n7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the official liquidator or\nofficeholder shall have the right to ask the Judge to reconsider that\nJudge\u2019s decision, for which purpose the applicant may ask the Judge's\npersonal assistant to fix an appointment for that applicant to appear\nbefore the Judge in person.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 228\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) is to ensure that an officeholder who is\nrequired or entitled to make an application to the Court in the\nperformance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will\nbe payable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not\nbe deterred from performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in\nthe position of having to pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s\nown pocket.\n7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an official liquidator has\nunder that liquidator\u2019s control \"sufficient money with which to pay the\nfees immediately\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge will have\nregard to the general rules as to priority contained in CWR Order 20,\nthe effect of which is that court fees rank ahead of an official\nliquidator's remuneration.\n7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under\nthat officeholder\u2019s control, that officeholder\u2019s application letter must\nstate (a) the amount which is immediately available; (b) the amount\nwhich is likely to become available to that officeholder within the next\n90 days; (c) the purposes for which the officeholder intends to spend\nsuch cash over the next 90 days; and (d) whether the officeholder has\nreceived any remuneration or holds funds in trust for that purpose.\n8.\nApplications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as\n\"consolidated\" for the purposes of assessing court fees\n8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff for a direction that two or more\nseparate proceedings governed by the Companies Winding Up Rules or\nGCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of\ncalculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable\npursuant to Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and\nrevised) must be made to the Registrar.\n8.2 Such applications should be made by letter addressed to the Registrar\nat the time of filing the originating process.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 229\n\n8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the\nprovisions of paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shall apply.\n9. Case Management Conferences\n9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of O.72, r.4(2), the assigned\nJudge may convene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit.\n\n9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if\nforeign lawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the\nparties or the assigned judge is likely to be off the Island.\n9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a telephone conference call, the\nRegistrar will direct one of the parties to set up the call and circulate\nthe dial-in instructions and codes to the judge and all the parties.\n9.4 The etiquette for telephonic CMCs requires that all participating\nattorneys (apart from leading counsel or foreign lawyers who may\nparticipate remotely) must be present in the court room or Judge's\nchambers and be on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge\nwill be the last person to join the conference, whereupon the Judge will\nask all the participants to identify themselves.\n\nWhere the CMC will not be determinative of substantive issues, the\njudge may, in advance to the hearing dispense with the need for the\nattorney(s) to be present at Court and, in which event, the other\nprovisions of this practice direction will apply accordingly.\n9.5 Telephonic CMC's may not be tape recorded without the consent of the\nJudge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be tape recorded,\nthe Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the\njudge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not tape\nrecorded, the note taken or approved by the judge will constitute the\nofficial record.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2016\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 230\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the assigned judge during the course of\na CMC and, in appropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the\nprincipal purpose of fixing the date for the trial or further hearings.\n10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD\n10 .1Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear\nsummonses for directions and interlocutory applications by means of\ntelephone or video conferences when they are off the Island.\n\n10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes\nplace by telephone or video conference.\n11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 15th day of\nFebruary, 2016. With effect from 15th day of February, 2016 Practice\nDirection No. 6 of 2015 is hereby revoked.\n\nHon, Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\n8th day of February, 2016\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 231\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017\nPayments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts\nAct and Grand Court Rules Order 92 (GCR O. 92).\n\nPayments into Court of trust funds under section 69 of the Trusts Act (as\namended and revised) and Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised)\nOrder 92 (GCR O. 92).\n\n1. Section 69 of the Trusts Act (as amended and revised) prescribes a\nspecial jurisdiction and procedure for payments into court by trustees.\nIt is a form of relief afforded to trustees who may, for a variety of\nrecognised reasons, wish to relieve themselves of the responsibility for\nholding trust funds. Examples are where a trustee is unable to obtain a\ndischarge for the funds (such as where the beneficiary of the trust is a\nminor or a patient) or where a beneficiary refused to consent to the sale\nof trust property against the wishes of the majority of beneficiaries. If\na trustee is in doubt as to who is entitled to a fund in that trustee\u2019s hands,\nGCR O.85 is generally available for the purpose of getting the point\ndecided and if so, this course should be followed instead of the funds\nbeing lodged in Court under section 69 of the Trusts Act (as amended\nand revised).\n\n2. For the purposes of section 69, the applicable rule is GCR Order 92 rule\n2. Where there are as yet no proceedings before the Court, the\napplicable rule is sub-rule 2(3), in which case the required affidavit\nprescribed by sub-rule 2(1) must be filed with the Accountant General\nof the Court, instead of directly with the Court.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO: 1 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 232\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.\nIn the case of a trust fund which is already the subject of proceedings\nbefore  the Court, the applicable procedure is prescribed by sub-rule\n2(2) which requires the affidavit prescribed by sub-rule (1) to be filed\ndirectly with the Court and a copy served upon the Accountant General\nof the Court.\n4.\nMonies paid in under sub-rule 2(2) or 2(3) will be held in escrow in a\nbank account by the Accountant General.\n\n5.\nNotice of the payment in must be served upon every interested party by\nthe trustee in keeping with rule 3.\n\n6.\nAny interested party will then be able to apply to the Court for payment\nout under rule 4.\n\n7.\nThis practice is to be distinguished from that for dealing with payments\ninto Court in relation to actions for debt or damages (see GCR Order\n22); or in relation to orders for security for costs (as permitted by GCR\nOrder 23 rule 2); or in relation to interpleader proceedings (GCR Order\n17 rule 4(c)).\n\nl August 2017\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 233\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\nRegistration of Foreign Maintenance Orders or Judgments Sections\n14, 22 and 23 of the Maintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\"the\nLaw\")\n\nINTRODUCTION\nThe Maintenance Act (as amended and revised) (\"the Law\") in sections 14,\n22 and 23, provides for the enforcement in the Island s of certain foreign\norders and judgments by way of registration. In broad terms, these are the\norders or judgments of the courts of England, Ireland and Jamaica and of\ncourts of countries (or of jurisdictions within countries) which are\ndesignated by Order made by the Cabinet and referenced within schedules\nto the Law. To date only the courts of Belize and two Canadian Provinces\n(the Yukon and Ontario) have been referenced within schedules by Orders\nmade under the Law.\n\nThe process of registration is meant to be simple and direct, avoiding the\nneed to prove the foreign order or judgment by way of suit. It is nonetheless\nessential that, as provided by the Law, once registered, the order or\njudgment is enforceable as if it had been made by a local court. To this end\nthe process requires that the foreign order or judgment is enforced by order\nof a judge of the Grand Court or (if it emanates from a foreign court which\nis not a court of superior jurisdiction) by an order of a Magistrate of the\nSummary Court.\n\nThis practice direction explains the procedure - adopted from Grand Court\nRules Order 71 which prescribes the procedure for the enforcement of\nforeign judgments under the Foreign Judgments Reciprocal Enforcement\nAct (as amended and revised) (the \"F.J.R.E.L.\"). Like under the Law, under\nthe F.J.R.E.L., only the judgments of those foreign countries or territories\nscheduled by Order of the Cabinet (and in the case of the F.J.R.E.L regarded\nas providing reciprocity) can be enforced by way of registration. Here too\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 234\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nunder F.J.R.E.L, at present, only the judgments of a limited number of\ncourts are enforceable by registration - those of the Superior Courts of\nAustralia and its External Territories.\n\nOther than under the Law and under the F.J.R.E.L, it remains the position\nthat foreign judgments can be enforced within the Islands only by way of\nbeing sued upon at common law.\n\nDIRECTIONS:\n1.\nThe Clerk of the Court shall be the \"Prescribed Officer\" for the\npurposes of section 14, 22 and 23 of the Law.\n\n2.\nThe Prescribed Officer shall maintain a Register of Foreign\nMaintenance Orders and Judgments (\"the Register\"). The Register will\nbe a public record.\n\n3.\nUpon receipt of an order or judgment of a foreign court capable of\nregistration under the Law, the Prescribed Officer shall apply to the\nGrand Court by ex parte originating summons for the registration of the\nforeign order or judgment.  Where the foreign order or judgment was\nmade by a court which is not a court of superior jurisdiction, the\nPrescribed Officer shall apply to the Summary Court.\n\n4.\nAn application for registration must be supported by an affidavit by the\nPrescribed Officer:\n(a) exhibiting the order or judgment or certified (or otherwise duly\nauthenticated) copy thereof and where the judgment is not in the\nEnglish language, a translation thereof in the English language\ncertified by a notary public or authenticated by affidavit;\n(b) stating the name and the usual or last known place of abode or\nbusiness of the judgment creditor and judgment debtor\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 235\n\nrespectively, so far as known to the prescribed officer or as\ndisclosed in the foreign order or judgment;\n(c) stating to the best of the information or belief of the Prescribed\nOfficer:\n\n(i) that the foreign order or judgment is a certified copy thereof\nof the  relevant foreign court duly transmitted to the Governor\nin keeping with section 14 of the Law.\n(ii) As the case may require, either that at the date of the\napplication the foreign order or judgment has not been\nsatisfied, or that the amount in respect of which it was made\nremains unsatisfied.\n\n5. (a)\nAn order of the Grand Court giving leave to register the foreign\norder or judgment shall be drawn up by the Prescribed Officer on\nbehalf of the judgment creditor and presented to the Judge or (in\nthe case of a foreign order or judgment made by a court which is\nnot a court of superior jurisdiction) to a Magistrate of the Summary\nCourt, for grant of registration.\n(b) An Order of the Grand or Summary Court giving leave to register\nshall state the period of time for compliance with the terms of the\nforeign order or judgment, and that failing which, the Prescribed\nOfficer will have leave automatically to take steps for enforcement\nas if the foreign order or judgment had been originally made by the\nGrand Court or Summary Court, respectively.\n(c) Upon grant of registration of the foreign order or judgment it shall\nbe entered in the Register and served upon the judgment debtor by\nnotice of its registration;\n(d) Notice of registration of a foreign order or judgment (with the\norder or judgment of the foreign court attached) must be served\nupon the judgment debtor by delivering it to the judgement debtor\npersonally at that judgment debtor\u2019s usual or last known place of\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 2 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 236\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nabode  or business as identified in keeping with paragraph 4(b)\nabove.\n\n6.\nExecution shall not issue for a foreign order or judgment registered\nunder the Law until after the period of time for compliance with the\nterms of the foreign order or judgment has expired.\n\n7.\nAn application for execution shall be supported by an affidavit of\nservice of the notice of registration of the foreign order or judgment\nand the order granting leave for its registration.\n\nl August 2017\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 237\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\nCourt Stenographer Services\n\nIntroduction\nFrom time to time questions have arisen about the responsibility of the\nstenographers to cover civil proceedings and to provide transcripts in\ncriminal cases. Recently, the question also arose whether they are obliged\nto provide copies of any back up audio recordings (\"BUARs\") that they may\nmake for the purpose of assisting them in producing the transcripts of\nproceedings in criminal cases.\nThe stenographers are engaged to provide verbatim records of proceedings\nin Grand Court criminal cases. While section 53(3) of the Criminal\nProcedure Code (as amended and revised) (\"the CPC\") contemplates that\nthis would include criminal proceedings before the Summary Courts,\nresources have only ever allowed for this to be done in the Grand Court.\nThe notes kept by the Chief Magistrate and Magistrates will continue to\ncomprise the official record of proceedings in the Summary Courts.\nConsideration is being given to the introduction of a digital audio recording\nsystem for the recording of proceedings in the Summary Courts and further\npractice directions will be issued when that system is in place.\n\nSection 53(1) of the CPC provides generally that, in the absence of other\nspecific statutory provision, the Judge may give directions as to the manner\nin which evidence is recorded in any proceedings before any criminal court.\nThese directions proceed on the basis of that provision (and of course on\nthe basis of the authority vested by section 95(7) of the Constitution) and\nare intended to explain and clarify the established practice.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 238\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n1.\nCriminal Cases:\nOfficial Transcripts\nThe transcript of criminal proceedings recorded by the stenographers\nand certified as correct by certificates given by the stenographers in\nkeeping with the terms of section 53 (4) of the CPC, will be the official\ntranscripts of the proceedings. In the production and certification of the\nfinal transcripts, the stenographers will be at liberty to confirm any\ndetails of the evidence or arguments with the defence or prosecution\nattorneys and, especially as to the details of the judge's summation to\nthe jury, with the trial judge. Experience has shown that even the\nBUARs kept by the stenographers will sometimes fail to record clearly\nnuances of pronunciation. For such reasons, attorneys are encouraged\nto make available to the stenographers copies of written submissions\nand the judges, copies of written summations.\nDaily transcripts\nIn an ideal world, daily transcripts would be provided on the ongoing\nbasis during trials. This is not however, a tenable proposition because\nnearly as much time may be required out of court for tidying up the\ntranscripts for certification before release, as needed for recording them\nin court.\nTranscripts will therefore not be available on the daily basis during\ncriminal trials.\nIt has however been agreed with the stenographers and is now\nestablished practice, that daily transcripts in draft (or so much of them\nas needed) will be provided to the judges if required for the purposes\nof directing the trials. As these will be in draft, the obvious reason why\nthe same service may not be extended to the attorneys (or defendants\nin person), is the likelihood that they would seek to rely upon the draft\ntranscripts as a conclusive record of whatever aspect of the proceedings\nthey seek to emphasise, even while they have not yet been certified.\nMore specifically, attorneys would seek to rely upon the draft transcript\nfor the purposes of examining or cross-examining the present or\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 239\n\nupcoming witnesses, an exercise that would be permissible only if the\ntranscript is certified.\n\nAttorneys will nonetheless still be able to call upon the stenographers,\nas the need may arise from time to time during a trial, to confirm any\naspect of the evidence from their notes.\n2. Transcripts for criminal appeal cases\nBy direction of the Court of Appeal,15 in an appeal against any\nconviction by the Grand Court, the appellant shall be entitled to receive\nfree of charge a transcript of any stenographer's note made at the trial,\nat the arraignment of the plea entered to the indictment and the judge's\nsumming up to the jury. In the case of an appeal against any sentence\nby the Grand Court, the appellant shall also be entitled to receive free\nof charge a transcript of any stenographer's note of the sentencing\nproceedings. Court of Appeal Rule 33A goes on to direct that further\naspects of the transcripts of criminal trials will be provided to parties\nonly where truly necessary for the preparation and presentation of\nappeals. As the need for these further transcripts should arise well in\nadvance of the Court of Appeal hearing, an application must be made\nin writing to a judge of the Grand Court explaining the need for them\nin keeping also with Rule 33A. In making such an application, the\napplicant shall state precisely which further parts of the trial transcript\nare sought, giving brief reasons why each part of the transcript sought\nis required. It is therefore clear that an objective of the rule, is to ensure\nthat applicants do not require more of the transcripts than will\nreasonably suffice for the filing and presentation of appeals.\n3. Recording and transcribing of ex tempore judgments in the Court\nof Appeal and the Grand Court\nThe stenographers have been extremely helpful in the Court of Appeal\nand the Grand Court by recording and transcribing ex tempore\n\n8 See Court of Appeal Rule 33A, as introduced by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules 2009.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 240\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\njudgments in both criminal and civil appeals and cases. In Grand Court\ncriminal cases the stenographers will provide directly to the judge the\ntranscript they have prepared of any ex tempore judgment or ruling.\nThe judge will then make any amendments, if necessary, and return the\ntranscript directly back to the stenographer. If it is required for purposes\nof an appeal, that transcript will be included in the appeal bundle. (In\nthe case of distribution to other judges and\/or for the Law Reports, the\nstenographer will put that transcript in Word and PDF formats and\nemail it to the officer responsible for distribution of judgments).\nIn the Court of Appeal the transcription of ex tempore judgments has\nusually been provided for criminal cases although exceptionally, the\nCourt may require this service for a civil case. In the Grand Court\nwhere the stenographers cover all criminal proceedings, the\ntranscription of ex tempore judgments will for civil cases, be provided\nif exceptionally required by a judge.\nThis practice will continue subject to the directions below which will\napply more generally to the practice in civil cases.\n4.\nStenographers notes and transcripts for civil cases.\nThe Judicial Administration remains unable to provide stenographer\nservices for civil cases generally although this may change with\nchanges to Government personnel policy to allow for the engagement\nof stenographers to provide this service.\nFor the time being, it therefore remains the obligation of the parties,\nwith the approval of the judge, to make their private arrangements for\nthese services in civil cases.\nBy the agreement of the parties and with the approval of the judge, the\nprivate stenographer's notes and transcriptions may be deemed the\nofficial record of the proceedings. Failing such agreement and\napproval, the judge's notes of the proceedings will be the official\nrecord.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 241\n\n5. Digital audio recording for chambers proceedings.\nThe Judicial Administration will continue to provide digital audio\nrecording equipment for the recording of chambers proceedings in all\ndivisions of the Grand Court.\nSuch recordings will be made (with the prior approval of the judge) and\nthe disc provided to the parties for transcription at their expense.\nThe transcription will not be regarded as an authorised transcript of the\nproceedings unless and until so approved by the judge; failing which,\nthe judge's notes of the proceedings will be the official record.\n6. Back Up Audio Recordings (BUARs)\n\uf0b7 Such recordings will be made (with the prior approval of the\njudge) and the disc provided to the parties for transcription at\ntheir expense.\n\uf0b7 BUARs, where they are made, will be the work product of the\nstenographers, kept for their assistance in providing the official\ntranscripts of the court.\n\uf0b7 The BUARs are not expected to be provided to anyone unless\nso ordered by the court under the following circumstances.\n\uf0b7 Upon a written application explaining why it is thought that any\npart of an official transcript is erroneous, a judge may direct that\nthe BUARs are played back by the stenographer for comparison\nwith the official transcript. This will be allowed in criminal\ncases only and when Defence and Crown Counsel are both\npresent or where the applicant is a defendant in person, only\nwhen the defendant (or an authorised representative) and\nCrown Counsel are both present.\n\uf0b7 A written record will be made of the exercise and of the\noutcome by the stenographer and must be signed by the\nstenographer and both parties.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 3 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 242\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n\uf0b7 Where a discrepancy is found as between the BUARs and the\nofficial transcript, this will immediately be brought to the\nattention of a judge (preferably the trial judge if available) who\nwill decide (if appropriate after consultation with the parties)\nwhat steps if any should be taken.\n\uf0b7 In no circumstances will BUARs simply be handed over to any\nparty.2\n\uf0b7 BUARs (when kept and relied upon by the stenographer for\nprovision of transcripts) will be kept for a period of 5 years to\nallow for the expiry of any time for appeal.\n\n4 August 2017.\n\n2 This direction, while recognising the right of an accused person under section 7 of the Constitution to any\nrecord of the proceedings (cf State of Mauritius [2017] UK PC 16), also recognises the need for the proper\nmanagement of the Court Records of and of the demands upon the time of Court officials, in particular the court\nstenographers.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 243\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017\nFiling of Winding Up Petitions\n\nThe filing of a petition to wind up a company if publicised can cause\nirreparable harm to its reputation, even if the petition is ultimately dismissed\nfor lack of merit.\nTo address this mischief, the Companies Winding Up Rules (CWRs)\nprescribe a certain procedure for the filing of winding up petitions. These\nare in CWR Rules 5, 1 and 14, dealing respectively with the Creditor's,\nContributory's and Cayman Islands Monetary Authority's petitions.\n1. Creditor's Petition\n(a) In keeping with CWR Rule 5, prior to presenting a creditor's\npetition, the petitioner's attorney must apply in writing (by letter or\nemail) to the FSD Registrar to have the proceeding assigned to a\nJudge and to fix a hearing date.\n(b) A creditor's petition shall not be filed or entered upon the Register\nof Writs and Actions (the \"Register\") unless and until the\nproceeding has been assigned to a Judge and a hearing date has\nbeen fixed and endorsed on the petition or stated in a notice of\nhearing filed simultaneously with the petition.\n(c) Where the Judge has made an order restricting the filing or\notherwise the publication of the petition, the petition may not be\nentered on the Register other than in keeping with the terms of the\norder or subsequent order.\n2. Contributory's Petition\n(a) Upon presentation of a contributory's petition, the petitioner must\nat the same time issue a summons for directions in respect of the\nmatters contained in CWR Rule 12, which will include directions\nas to whether or not the petition is to be advertised.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO: 4 OF 2017\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 244\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(b) Prior to presenting a contributory's petition and issuing the\nsummons for directions in respect of it, the petitioner\u2019s attorney\nmust apply in writing (by letter or by email) to the FSD Registrar\nto have the proceeding assigned to a Judge and to fix a date for\nhearing the summons for directions.\n(c) Unless and until the Judge has fixed a date for hearing the\nsummons for directions or otherwise directs, the petition shall not\nbe entered upon the Register.\n3.\nAuthority's Petition\n(a) Prior to presenting a petition, the Authority's attorney must apply\nin writing (by letter or email) to the FSD Registrar to have the\nproceeding assigned to a Judge and to fix a date for hearing the\nsummons for directions.\n(b) Upon the presentation of a petition by the Authority, the Authority\nmust at the same time issue a summons for directions in respect of\nthe matters contained in CWR Rule 15. A petition presented by the\nAuthority shall not be advertised or entered in the Register unless\nand until the Judge otherwise directs.\n\nChief Justice\n4 August 2017\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 245\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\nCourt-to-court communications and cooperation in cross-border\ninsolvency and restructuring cases\n\nThe Guidelines \u2013 what they cover and when they should be used.\n\n1.  This practice direction deals with the use and adoption in cases pending\nbefore the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (Court) of published\nguidelines relating to court-to-court communications and cooperation\nin cross-border insolvency and restructuring proceedings.\n\n2.  There are two main sets of guidelines (Guidelines) for court-to-court\ncommunications and cooperation which might be adopted in this\njurisdiction, with appropriate modifications. These are the American\nLaw Institute\/International Insolvency Institute Guidelines Applicable\nto Court-to-Court Communications in Cross-Border Cases and The\nJudicial Insolvency Network Guidelines for Communication and\nCooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters.\nCopies of the current versions of both sets of Guidelines are attached\nto this Practice Direction.\n\n3. The Guidelines primarily cover the procedural rules that may be\nadopted and applied in particular cross-border cases for regulating the\nmanner of communications between the courts involved, the\nappearance of counsel in each court, notification to parties in parallel\nproceedings, the acceptance as authentic of official documents or\norders made in the foreign jurisdiction or court and joint hearings. They\nare to be applied either by being incorporated in a protocol between the\nrespective officeholders which protocol is then approved by the Court\n(and other courts involved as required) or by a separate order of the\nCourt without a protocol (and orders of the other courts involved as\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 246\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nrequired), in each case subject to such modifications as may be required\nin the circumstances.\n\n4.  The Guidelines are relevant where the insolvency or restructuring\nproceedings are being supervised by, or involve related applications to,\ncourts in more than one jurisdiction. Such proceedings will include\nliquidation (including provisional and voluntary liquidation) and other\ninsolvency or restructuring proceedings involving applications to court.\nAccordingly, the Guidelines will be relevant to schemes of\narrangement relating to a company being supervised by the Court\nwhich also involve a parallel scheme (or debt adjustment proceeding)\nor ancillary proceedings in another jurisdiction (and may also be\nrelevant in cases in which the Court has appointed a receiver or other\nofficer of the Court and where the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority\nhas appointed a controller pursuant to the Cayman Islands regulatory\nlaws). The Guidelines can apply whether the officeholder is appointed\nby the Court or is appointed out of Court and whether the person is\nappointed in respect of a company (incorporated in the Cayman Islands\nor abroad) other legal entity (established in the Cayman Islands or\nabroad) or an individual.\n\n5.  Officeholders appointed in the Cayman Islands, companies subject to\nrestructuring proceedings supervised by the Court and other interested\nparties involved in cross-border insolvency cases should consider, at\nthe earliest opportunity, whether to incorporate some or all of the\nGuidelines with suitable modifications either into an international\nprotocol to be approved by the Court or an order of the Court adopting\nthe Guidelines.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 247\n\nOfficial liquidators of Cayman Islands companies\n6.  Official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated companies subject\nto an official liquidation under Part V of the Companies Act (as\namended and revised) are already under a duty, pursuant to Order 21,\nr.2(1) of the Companies Winding Up Rules (CWRs), to consider\nwhether or not it is appropriate to enter into an international protocol\nwith any foreign officeholder (in a case in which the company in\nliquidation is subject to a concurrent bankruptcy proceeding under the\nlaw of a foreign country or has assets located in a foreign country which\nare the subject of a bankruptcy proceeding or receivership under the\nlaw of that country).\n\nThe purpose of such a protocol is to promote the orderly administration\nof the estate of the company to avoid duplication of work and conflict\nbetween the official liquidator and the foreign officeholder (CWR\nO.21, r.2(2)) and the protocol only takes effect when approved both by\nthe Court and the foreign court (CWR O.21, r.2(3)). The CWRs provide\nthat the protocol may define and allocate responsibilities between the\nofficial liquidator and the foreign officeholder in respect of the various\nmatters set out in CWR O.21, r.3. These include procedures for the\nexchange of information between the officeholders; procedures for\nreporting to creditors and\/or contributories and procedures for\ncoordinating sanction applications made to the Grand Court and the\nforeign court.\n\nConsideration should be given by official liquidators to the\nincorporation of the Guidelines into the international protocol.\n\n7.  While official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated companies\nare required to consider whether to enter into an international protocol\nwhich deals with the matters set out in CWR O.21, r.3 they are not\nrequired to limit any protocol they enter into to such matters. The\nprotocol may, subject to the approval of the Court, cover other matters\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No: 1 of 2018\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 248\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nincluding court-to-court communications and cooperation as provided\nfor in the Guidelines. In addition, even if official liquidators conclude\nthat a protocol is not appropriate (or that it is not appropriate to\n\nincorporate the Guidelines into such a protocol) the Guidelines with\nsuitable modifications may be adopted by an order of the Court which\ngives directions with respect to the procedures to be followed.\n\nOther Cayman Islands officeholders\n8.  While it is only official liquidators of Cayman Islands incorporated\ncompanies subject to an official liquidation who have a duty under the\nCWR to consider entering into an international protocol, other Cayman\nIslands officeholders or companies subject to restructuring proceedings\nsupervised by the Court may enter into a protocol incorporating the\nGuidelines or may apply for an order adopting the Guidelines and this\nPractice Direction will apply in such cases.\n\n9.  To the extent that Cayman Islands officeholders or companies subject\nto restructuring proceedings supervised by the Court are unclear as to\nthe manner in which to use and apply the Guidelines in any particular\ncase, they may apply to the Court at any early stage in the proceedings\nfor directions.\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nMay 31, 2018\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 249\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019\nDIRECTIONS FOR PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER SECTION 238\nOF THE COMPANIES ACT\n\nUpon the presentation of a petition pursuant to section 238 of the\nCompanies Act (as amended and revised), the party presenting the petition\nmust at the same time issue a summons seeking directions in respect of the\nfollowing matters:\n\n1. The opening and population of, and access to, an indexed electronic\ndata room (or other proposal) for maintaining documents relevant to\nthe fair value of the subject company as of the relevant valuation date\n(the \"Valuation Date\").\n\n2. The discovery and inspection of documents relevant to the fair value of\nthe subject company as at the Valuation Date (including any documents\nthat should be specifically discovered), inclusive of documents existing\nboth before and after the Valuation Date.\n\n3. The provision of any lay evidence (if appropriate).\n\n4. The provision of any expert evidence including:\n(a) the instruction and disciplines of expert witnesses;\n(b) the convening and conduct of meetings between expert witnesses\nand members of the management of the subject company;\n(c) the request by, and responses to, expert witnesses for documents\nand information relevant to the fair value of the subject company;\n(d) the exchange of expert witness reports;\n(e) meetings of experts and the provision of a joint expert\nmemorandum; and\n(f) the exchange of supplemental expert witness reports.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO. 1 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 250\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.\nThe manner in which evidence is to be given.\n\n6.\nIf evidence is directed to be given by affidavit, directions relating to\ncross-examination of the deponent\/s.\n\n7.\nThe listing of any case management conference.\n\n8.\nThe listing of the trial of the petition.\n\n9.\nSuch other procedural matters as the party thinks fit.\n\nFebruary 26, 2019\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 251\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\nAdoption of Judicial Insolvency Network Modalities\nFor Court-To-Court Communications\n\n1. The Grand Court Financial Services Division (\u201cFSD\u201d) adopted the\nJudicial\nInsolvency\nNetwork\n(\u201cJIN\u201d)\nGuidelines\nfor\nCommunication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border\nInsolvency Cases on 31 May, 2018 (see Practice Direction No. 1\nof 2018).\n\n2. JIN adopted the Modalities of Court-to-Court Communication on\n25 July 2019 (the \u201cModalities\u201d). The Modalities are designed to\nestablish an administrative framework within which the JIN\nGuidelines will operate.\n\n3. The FSD hereby adopts the Modalities as set out in the Appendix\nhereto with effect from 1 August 2019.\n\n4. Pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Modalities, the FSD appoints Justice\nIan RC Kawaley of the FSD as the Facilitator.\n\n5. Pursuant to paragraph 7 of the Modalities, the FSD identifies\nEnglish as the language in which initial communications may be\nmade.\n\nDated this 31st day of July 2019\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 252\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nAPPENDIX\n\nMODALITIES OF COURT-TO-COURT COMMUNICATION\n\nScope and definitions\n1.  These Modalities apply to direct communications (written or oral)\nbetween courts in specific cases of cross-border proceedings relating to\ninsolvency or adjustment of debt opened in more than one jurisdiction\n(\u201cParallel Proceedings\u201d). Nothing in this document precludes indirect\nmeans of communication between courts, such as through the parties\nor by exchange of transcripts, etc. This document is subject to any\napplicable law.\n\n2.  These Modalities govern only the mechanics of communication\nbetween courts in Parallel Proceedings. For the principles of\ncommunication (e.g., that court to-court communications should not\ninterfere with or derogate from the jurisdiction or the exercise of\njurisdiction by a court in any proceedings, etc.), reference may be made\nto the Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts\nin Cross-Border Insolvency Matters (the \u201cGuidelines\u201d) issued by the\nJudicial Insolvency Network in October 2016.\n\n3.  These Modalities contemplate contact being initiated by an \u201cInitiating\nJudge\u201d (defined below). The parties before such judge may request that\nJudge to initiate such contact, or the Initiating Judge may seek it on that\nIntitating Judge\u2019s own initiative.\n\n4.  In this document:\n(a)  \u201cInitiating Judge\u201d refers to the judge initiating communication in\nthe first instance;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 253\n\n(b)  \u201cReceiving Judge\u201d refers to the judge receiving communication in\nthe first instance;\n\n(c)  \u201cFacilitator\u201d refers to the person(s) designated by the court where\nthe Initiating Judge sits or the court where the Receiving Judge sits\n(as the case may be) to initiate or receive communications on\nbehalf of the Initiating Judge or the Receiving Judge in relation to\nParallel Proceedings.\n\nDesignation of Facilitator\n5.  Each court may designate one or more judges or administrative officials\nas the Facilitator. It is recommended that, where the Facilitator is not a\njudge, a judge be designated to supervise the initial steps in the\ncommunication process.\n\n6.  Courts should prominently publish the identities and contact details of\ntheir Facilitators, such as on their websites.\n\n7.  Courts should prominently list the language(s) in which initial\ncommunications may be made and the technology available to facilitate\ncommunication between or among courts (e.g. telephonic and\/or video\nconference capabilities, any secure channel email capacity, etc.).\n\nInitiating communication\n8.  To initiate communication in the first instance, the Initiating Judge may\nrequire the parties over whom that Judge exercises jurisdiction to\nobtain the identity and contact details of the Facilitator of the other\ncourt in the Parallel Proceedings, unless the information is already\nknown to the Initiating Judge.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 254\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n9.  The first contact with the Receiving Judge should be in writing,\nincluding by email, from the Facilitator of the Initiating Judge\u2019s court\nto the Facilitator of the Receiving Judge\u2019s court, and contain the\nfollowing:\n\n(a)  the name and contact details of the Facilitator of the Initiating\nJudge\u2019s court;\n\n(b)  the name and title of the Initiating Judge as well as contact\ndetails of the Initiating Judge in the event that the Receiving\nJudge wishes to contact the Initiating Judge directly and such\ncontact is acceptable to the Initiating Judge;\n\n(c)  the reference number and title of the case filed before the\nInitiating Judge and the reference number and title (if known;\notherwise, some other identifier) of the case filed before the\nReceiving Judge in the Parallel Proceedings;\n\n(d)  the nature of the case (with due regard to confidentiality\nconcerns);\n\n(e)  whether the parties before the Initiating Judge have consented\nto the communication taking place (if there is any order of\ncourt, direction or protocol for court-to-court communication\nfor the case approved by the Initiating Judge, this information\nshould also be provided);\n\n(f) if appropriate, the proposed date and time for the\ncommunication requested (with due regard to time\ndifferences); and\n\n(g)  the specific issue(s) on which communication is sought by the\nInitiating Judge.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 255\n\nArrangements for communication\n10. The Facilitator of the Initiating Judge\u2019s court and the Facilitator of the\nReceiving Judge\u2019s court may communicate fully with each other to\nestablish appropriate arrangements for the communication without the\nnecessity for participation of counsel or the parties unless otherwise\nordered by one of the courts.\n\n11. The time, method and language of communication should be to the\nsatisfaction of the Initiating Judge and the Receiving Judge, with due\nregard given to the need for efficient management of the Parallel\nProceedings.\n\n12. Where translation or interpretation services are required, appropriate\narrangements shall be made, as agreed by the courts. Where written\ncommunication is provided through translation, the communication in\nits original form should also be provided.\n\n13. Where it is necessary for confidential information to be communicated,\na secure means of communication should be employed where possible.\n\nCommunication between the Initiating Judge and the Receiving\nJudge\n14.  After the arrangements for communication have been made, discussion\nof the specific issue(s) on which communication was sought by the\nInitiating Judge and subsequent communications in relation thereto\nshould, as far as possible, be carried out between the Initiating Judge\nand the Receiving Judge in accordance with any protocol or order for\ncommunication and cooperation in the Parallel Proceedings.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 256\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n15.  If the Receiving Judge wishes to by-pass the use of a Facilitator, and\nthe Initiating Judge has indicated that that Initiating Judge is amenable,\nthe judges may communicate with each other about the arrangements\nfor the communication without the necessity for the participation of\ncounsel or the parties.\n\n16.  Nothing in this document should limit the discretion of the Initiating\nJudge to contact the Receiving Judge directly in exceptional\ncircumstances.1\n\n1 http:\/\/jin-global.org\/content\/jin\/pdf\/Modalities_for_court-to-court_communication.pdf\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 257\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\nPROCEEDINGS IN THE FAMILY DIVISION OF THE GRAND COURT:\nCOSTS ESTIMATES\n\nThe costs incurred in the Family Division of the Grand Court are, in a great\nnumber of cases, disproportionally high in relation to (i) the value of assets\ninvolved; or (ii) the realistic amount of child\/spousal maintenance being\nclaimed, or (iii) the nature of the children issues. Often a Judge will be\nunable to make a realistic determination in financial ancillary relief\nproceedings without an indication of costs incurred and\/or an approximate\nindication of anticipated costs of each side. It is, moreover, in the interests\nof the parties themselves that each should be aware, throughout the\nproceedings, of the actual and potential liability for costs.\n\nTherefore:\n(I)  Subject  to paragraph (2), no later than 3 p.m. on the last working day\nprior to each court hearing each party shall exchange with each other\nand deliver to the court a written estimate in Form A of the costs\nincurred by each party up to the date of that hearing.\n\n(2)  Not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the final hearing of an\napplication for ancillary relief, each party must (unless the Court directs\notherwise) file with the Court and serve on the other party a statement\nin Form B giving full particulars of all costs in respect of the\nproceedings which each party has incurred or expects to incur, to enable\nthe court to take account of the parties' liabilities for costs when\ndeciding what order (if any) to make for ancillary relief.\n\nNon-compliance with this Practice Direction may have a consequence. To\nthe extent necessary for the proper management or disposal of the case that\ncompliance be insisted upon, orders for costs can be made against either\nparty in default or against defaulting lawyers. Those who default may find\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 258\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthat their case is put to the end of the court list or the case may be taken out\nof the list altogether.\n\nDated this 25th   day of September 2019\n\nAttachments:     Form A\n Form B\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 259\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 260\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 261\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019\nCriminal Procedure - Remand Warrants where defendant found unfit\nto plead - Committal Warrants where defendant found to be not\nguilty by reason of insanity\n\nl.  By sections 48 and 122 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (\"the\nCode\"), persons who are found to be unfit to plead are described as \" of\nunsound mind and incapable of making (his or her) defence\" or as\n\"insane and unfit to stand triaI\". Such persons are awaiting trial as\ndefendants and, where not released on bail into the custody of a\nguardian in keeping with section 48(2), are remanded by the Court on\nreport to the Governor, pending fitness to stand trial. The Governor\nmay then order the defendant to be detained in any hospital or other\nplace appointed which will usually be His Majesty's Prison\n[(Northward or Fairbanks) as the case may be] because there is, for the\ntime being, no other facility available.\n\nIt is therefore required that warrants for remand of such defendants\nsuitably describe their condition by specifying the basis upon which\nthey are remanded.\n\nAccordingly, a warrant for remand of such a defendant shall specify, in\nkeeping with section 48(3) of the Code, that \"the defendant has been\nfound by the Court to be un fit to stand trial and is remanded to His\nMajesty's Prison [(Northward or Fairbanks) as the case may be] until\nfurther order of the Court or until discharged by order of the\nGovernor\".\n\nIn keeping with section 50 of the Code, the proceedings may be later\nresumed by the direction of the Court.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2019\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 262\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2.\nSimilar concerns attend the committal of persons who have been found\nnot guilty by reason of insanity pursuant to section 158 and are to be\nremanded pursuant to section 159 of the Code.\n\nSection 159(1) provides that the Court shall order such persons to be\nconveyed to any hospital or other place for the time being appointed\nunder any law to be a mental hospital and for the reception of criminally\ninsane persons, there to be kept until discharged by the Governor. For\nthe time being, the place appointed is His Majesty's Prison Northward\n[(or Fairbanks as the case might be)].\n\nAccordingly, a warrant for committal of such a person shall specify that\n\"he\/she has been found to be not guilty by reason  of  insanity  and\nshall  be  conveyed  to  His Majesty 's Prison Northward [(or\nFairbanks)]  as  the  place  for  the  time  being appointed for the\nreception of criminally insane persons there to be kept  until discharged\nby order of the Governor\".\n\n3.\nThis Practice Direction will be revised and reissued once another place\nis appointed for the reception of persons who are found to be unfit to\nplead or not guilty by reason of insanity.\n\nOctober 21, 2019\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 263\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\nMEDIATION INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT RULES 2020\n\nIntroduction\nMediation of family disputes offers many advantages over resolution of\ndisputes through the court. Consequently, the court actively monitors all\nfamily disputes to determine whether the couples concerned should attend\na meeting with a family mediator to learn about the mediation process and\nthe merits of mediation over litigation in court.\n\nAlthough mediation is suitable for many family disputes, it is not suitable\nin all cases and the Mediation Information and Assessment Rules (as\nemended and revised) (\u201cMIAM Rules\u201d) provide for exemptions. It is also\nrecognised that drug and\/or alcohol abuse, and\/or mental illness, are likely\nto prevent couples from participating effectively in mediation.\n\nSummary\n1. The purpose of this Practice Direction is to provide guidance in respect\nof the MIAM Rules and to set out good practice to be followed by\nrespondents who are expected to also attend a MIAM.\n\n2. Under the MIAM Rules it is now presumed that if a person makes\ncertain kinds of applications the parties will be ordered to attend a\nMIAM before continuing with the application. (A list of these\napplications is set out in Rule 6.) The court has a general power to\nadjourn proceedings in order for non-court dispute resolution to be\nattempted, including attendance at a MIAM to consider family\nmediation and other options.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 264\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n3.\nA MIAM is a short meeting that provides information about mediation\nas a way of resolving disputes. A MIAM is conducted by a trained\nmediator who will assess whether mediation is appropriate in the\ncircumstances. A MIAM should be held within 28 days after an order\nfor referral from the court.\n\n4.\nThere are exemptions to the MIAM presumption. They are set out in\nthe MIAM Rules.\n\n5.\nThe effect of the MIAM presumption and the MIAM Rules is that a\nperson who makes certain kinds of applications to the court must first\nattend a MIAM unless a ' MIAM exemption' applies. These exemptions\nare set out in Rule 8.\n\n6.\nWhen making certain kinds of applications (see paragraphs 12 and 13\nbelow), an applicant must therefore provide on the relevant form one\nof the following \u2014\n(i) confirmation from a mediator that (s)he has attended a MIAM; or\n(ii) a claim that a MIAM exemption applies. An applicant who claims\nan exemption from the MIAM requirement is not required to attach\nany supporting evidence with that applicant\u2019s application, but\nshould bring any supporting evidence to the first appointment\nhearing.\n\n7.\nIf an applicant claims a MIAM exemption, at the first appointment\nhearing before the Grand Court or at the initial hearing before the\nSummary Court, the court will inquire into the exemption claimed. At\nthe first appointment hearing before the Grand Court or at the initial\nhearing before the Summary Court, the court may review any\nsupporting evidence in order to ensure that the MIAM exemption was\nvalidly claimed. As set out in more detail below, if a MIAM exemption\nhas not been validly claimed, the court may direct the parties to attend\na MIAM, and may adjourn proceedings for that purpose.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 265\n\nBackground: Consideration of mediation and other non-court dispute\nresolution\n8. The adversarial court process is not always best suited to the resolution\nof family disputes. Such disputes are often best resolved through\ndiscussion and agreement, where that can be managed safely and\nappropriately.\n\n9. Family mediation is one way of settling disagreements. A trained\nmediator can help the parties to reach an agreement. A mediator who\nconducts a MIAM is an independent facilitator who can also discuss\nother forms of dispute resolution if mediation is not appropriate.\n\n10. Attendance at a MIAM provides an opportunity for the parties to a\ndispute to receive information about the process of mediation and to\nunderstand the benefits it can offer as a way to resolve disputes. At that\nmeeting, a trained mediator will discuss with the parties the nature of\ntheir dispute and will explore with them whether mediation would be a\nsuitable way to resolve the issues on which there is disagreement.\n\nThe applications to which the MIAM presumption applies\n11. The MIAM presumption applies to private law proceedings relating to\nchildren and proceedings for a financial remedy as set out in Rule 1.\n\nMaking an application\n12. An application to the court in any of the proceedings specified above\nmust be accompanied by the relevant court form which must contain\neither: (a) a confirmation from a mediator that the applicant has\nattended a MIAM; or (b) a claim by the applicant that a MIAM\nexemption applies (the list of MIAM exemptions is set out in Rule 8(l)).\n\n13. The relevant form can be completed either by the applicant or that\napplicant\u2019s attorney. Any reference in this Practice Direction or in the\nRules to completion of the form by an applicant includes a reference to\ncompletion by an attorney.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 266\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nMIAM exemptions\n14. Rule 8(1) sets out the circumstances in which the MIAM presumption\ndoes not apply. These are called MIAMS exemptions.\n\n15. In order to claim that a MIAM exemption applies, an applicant will\nneed to complete the relevant form.\n\n16. Applicants should note that some of the MIAM exemptions require that\ncertain evidence is available. This evidence does not need to be\nprovided with the application but applicants should bring such evidence\nto the first appointment hearing because the court will inquire into such\nevidence in order to determine whether the MIAM exemption has been\nvalidly claimed.\n\nFinding a family mediator\n17. As set out in Rule 9, only a family mediator may conduct a MIAM.\nUnder that Rule, a family mediator is a Grand Court Judge who is\nassigned to the Family Division, or a Magistrate, or one of the persons\nor class of persons identified in the Schedule to this Practice Direction\nas may be issued from time to time by the Chief Justice.\n\n18. Further information about mediation including a list of family\nmediators and their contact details can be found at www.judicial.ky.\n\nMIAM exemption: Inquiries by the court\n19. Where a MIAM exemption requires that an applicant supply certain\nevidence to support that applicant\u2019s claim to the exemption, (s)he\nshould bring that evidence to the first appointment hearing.  At that\nhearing the court will inquire into that evidence to determine whether\n(s)he has a valid claim to that MIAM exem ption.\n\n20. The court may, if appropriate, adjourn proceedings where the applicant\nis unable to supply that evidence or it may give directions about how\nand when the applicant is to file such evidence with the court.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 267\n\n21. If the court determines that the applicant has not validly claimed a\nMIAM exemption, it may direct the parties, to attend a MIAM and may\nadjourn proceedings pending attendance at that MIAM.\n\nDefinitions\n22. For the purpose of this Practice Direction the definitio ns in the MIAM\nRules apply. Pursuant to Rule 1 of the MIAM Rules the Schedule to\nthis Practice Direction sets out a list of family mediators.\n\nRevocation of Practice Direction No 2 of 2016\n23. Practice Direction No 2 of 2016 is hereby revoked.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 268\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSCHEDULE TO PRACTICE DIRECTION No 1 OF 2020\n\nChief Justice Anthony Smellie\nJustice Richard Williams\nJustice Robin McMillan\nJustice Cheryll Richards\n\nChief Magistrate Nova Hall\nMagistrate Kirsty Gunn\nMagistrate Angelyn Hernandez\nMagistrate Philippa McFarlane\n\nMrs. Leslie Talbot\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 269\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\nCOVID 19: GUIDANCE FOR THE FAMILY DIVISION - 25 MARCH 2020\n\n1.  This Guidance, which is issued by the Chief Justice, is intended to be\nfollowed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division.\n\n2.  The aim of the Guidance is to 'Keep Business Going Safely'. There is a\nstrong public interest in the Family Justice System continuing to\nfunction as normally as possible despite the present pandemic. At the\nsame time, in accordance with government guidance, there is a need for\nall reasonable and sensible precautions to be taken to prevent infection\nand, in particular, to avoid non-essential personal contact.\n\n3.  The government guidance is, however, primarily aimed at the social\nsetting, rather than the business\/work environment. Depending on the\ncircumstances there may be the need, and no harm involved, in having\na number of people present in court for an oral hearing.\n\n4.  Taking these competing factors together, whilst the default position\nshould be that, for the time being, all Family Division hearings should\nbe undertaken remotely either via email, telephone, video or Zoom, etc\n['remote hearing'], where the requirements of fairness and justice\nrequire a court-based hearing, and it is safe to conduct one, then a courtbased hearing should take place. The Court will ensure that the\nappropriate distancing measures set out in the Family Division\nprotocols are put in place.\n\nPractice Directions and Guidance\n5.  Grand Court Practice Directions No. 2 of 2004 \u201cProceedings by way of\nVideo Conferencing Civil or Criminal\u201d and the accompanying \u2018Video\nConferencing Guide\u201d were issued by the Chief Justice on 16th May\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 270\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n2004. The use of remote hearings in appropriate cases is consistent with\nthe Court\u2019s duty under the Overriding Objective to deal with every\ncause or matter in a just, expeditious and economical way. Video\nconferencing has been used in the Grand Court for a number of years.\nThe Family Division has in appropriate cases held hearings and\nreceived evidence by telephone or by using any other method of direct\noral communication. In the current circumstance where facilities are\navailable to the court and the parties, the Court should consider making\nfull use of technology, including electronic information exchange and\nvideo or telephone conferencing.\n\nRemote hearings\n6.  There is no category of case that may be listed in the Family Division\nwhich necessarily requires the physical attendance of key participants\nin the same courtroom. The determination of whether or not a remote\nhearing is to take place will not therefore turn on the estimated length\nof the hearing but upon other case specific factors.\n\n7.  The following categories may be suitable for remote hearings:\na. All directions and case management hearings\nb. Public Law Children:\ni. Emergency Protection Order\nii Interim Care\/Supervision Orders\nc. Private Law Children:\ni. First appointment Hearings on Family Mention Days\nii. Other interim hearings\niii. Simple short contested cases\nd. Injunction applications where there is no evidence that is to be heard\n(or only limited evidence)\ne. Financial Cases\nf. Appeals\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 271\n\ng. Other hearings as directed by the judge concerned\n8.  Where a case in one category listed in paragraph 7 above has already\nbeen listed for a hearing at which the parties are due to attend court\nthen, if it is possible to make arrangements for a fixed hearing to be\nconducted remotely, the hearing should go ahead remotely without any\npersonal attendance at court. A draft directions order is at Appendix\nA below.\n\n9.  It is possible that other cases may also be suitable to be dealt with\nremotely. As the current situation is changing rapidly, the question of\nwhether any particular case is heard remotely must be determined on a\ncase-by-case basis.\n\n10.  Where a case cannot be listed for a remote hearing as matters stand then\nany existing listing should be adjourned and the case must be listed\npromptly for a directions hearing, which should be conducted remotely.\nThe primary aim of the directions hearing should be to identify the\noptimal method of conducting the court process in order to achieve a\nfair and just hearing of the issues but, at the same time, minimising as\nmuch as possible the degree of inter-personal contact between each\nparticipant. In appropriate cases, this may involve the use of a remote\nhearing where it is possible to conduct the court process in a manner\nthat achieves a fair and just consideration of the issues. Although\nconsideration may be given as to whether it is possible to conduct a\ncomplicated extensive multi-party hearing using the Zoom system, in\nsuch cases it may be necessary for the personal attendance at court, for\nsome or all of the hearing, by some or all of the participants.\n\n11. At any directions hearing to discuss the future hearing arrangements,\njudges should also require the parties to focus on the realistic options\nthat are currently available to meet the child\u2019s welfare needs during the\npresent straitened circumstances.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 272\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nUrgent Cases\n12. Even where a case is urgent, it should be possible for arrangements to\nbe made for it to be conducted remotely. The default position should\nbe that the hearing is conducted remotely. Where a case is genuinely\nurgent, and it is not possible to conduct a remote hearing and there is a\nneed for pressing issues to be determined, then the court should\nendeavour to conduct a face-to-face hearing in circumstances (in terms\nof the physical arrangement of the court room and in the waiting area)\nwhich minimise the opportunity for infection.\n\nRemote Hearings: technical matters\n13. Remote hearings may be conducted using the following facilities as\nappropriate to the individual case:\na.  By way of an email exchange between the court and the parties;\nb.  By way of telephone using conference calling facilities;\nc.  By way of the court's video-link system, if available;\nd.  The use of Zoom;\ne.  Any other appropriate means of remote communication, for\nexample Skype or Face Time.\n\nThe Court IT Department will assist to make the arrangements for\nZoom and will provide advice to participants about to use Zoom.\n\nIf you are unfamiliar with Zoom here is the help page from Zoom\nhttps:\/\/support.zoom.us\/hc\/en-us\/articles\/206618765-Zoom-VideoTutoriaIs\nand\nfurther\nguidance\nand\nvideo\nhttps:\/\/learninginbloom.com\/use-zoom\/\n\n14. The Judge may require certain hearings to be recorded. Where Zoom is\nused, there is a facility within the software for the digital record of the\nhearing to be recorded (this is not the same as a typed transcript but\nmay suffice for most purposes).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 273\n\n15. The responsibility for making technical and other arrangements for a\nremote hearing and for confirming the details of the arrangements for\nthe hearing to the other parties no later than 24 hours prior to the remote\nhearing taking place is to be undertaken by the following party liaising\nwith the court:\na.  The Department of Children and Family Services in a public law\ncase;\nb.  The applicant, if legally represented, in a private law case;\nc.  The respondent, if legally represented and where the applicant is\nnot, in a private law case;\nd.  The court where no party is legally represented.\n\n16.  When conducting a remote hearing, there is a need for the judge to use\ntheir best endeavours to ensure that only those who would be allowed\ninto the court room for an oral hearing are privy to the remote hearing\nand that all parties understand that the system used by the court will\nrecord the proceedings and that no other recording is to be made by any\nof the parties.\n\n17.  On the day before a remote hearing the applicant must electronically\nfile a PDF bundle which complies with Practice Direction No. 11\/2014,\nand which in any event must include as a minimum:\na.  A case summary and chronology;\nb.  The parties' positions statements;\nc.  The previous orders that are relevant to the remote hearing;\nd.  All essential documents that the court requires to determine the\nissues that fall for determination at the remote hearing;\ne.  A draft order;\n\nFinal Observation\n18. These are exceptional and unprecedented times. The situation is\nchanging daily. This Guidance is intended to deliver a very significant\nchange of direction in the method of working within the Family\nDivision, whilst at the same time enabling the Court to continue to\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 274\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\noperate and to meet the pressing needs of those who turn to it for\nprotection and justice.\n\n25 March 2020\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 275\n\nAPPENDIX A\n\nIn the Grand Court\nNo: ______\nFamily Division\/\nThe Family Court\n\nIN THE MATTER OF ______________\n\nAND IN THE MATTER OF _________________ CHILDREN\n\nBEFORE __________\nSITTING AT _________ ON  _______\n\nUPON the Court determining that in the exceptional circumstances of the current public\nhealth emergency this case is suitable for hearing remotely ('remote hearing') by means of\n[video link]\/ [Skype]\/ [telephone]\/ [other].\n\nBY ITS OWN MOTION\/ BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT:\n\n1.\nAll hearings in this matter shall take place by way of remote hearing unless the court\ndirects otherwise.\n2.\nThe parties and their representatives shall attend all hearings by way of [video\nlink]\/[Skype]\/[telephone]\/[ other].\n3.\nNo unauthorised person may be present at this hearing. When asked, each legal\nrepresentative must be able to confirm that no unauthorised person is in attendance or\nable to listen to the hearing.\n4.\nThis matter shall be listed for a remote hearing on___________ at_________ before\n___________sitting at__________________ with a time estimate of _________ .\n5.\nThe parties shall arrange and attend remotely an Attorneys Meeting no less than 48\nhours before the hearing listed above.\n6.\nThe [applicant\/respondent] shall be responsible for arranging with the Judge's\nPersonal Assistant\/The Court IT Department the necessary facilities to conduct a\nremote hearing, allowing sufficient time for any necessary testing to take place. This\nwill include provision to the court of the necessary contact details for the parties and\ntheir representatives where these are needed to facilitate the remote hearing.\n7.\nThe [applicant\/respondent) must confirm the details of the arrangements for the\nhearing to the other parties by no later than 24 hours prior to the remote hearing taking\nplace.\n8.\nThe applicant shall by 1600 hrs on the day before the hearing electronically file a PDF\nbundle, which must include:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 276\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(a)\nA case summary and chronology;\n(b)\nThe parties positions statements;\n(c)\nThe previous orders that are relevant to the remote hearing;\n(d)\nAll essential documents that the court requires to determine the issues\nthat fall for determination at the remote hearing;\n(e)\nA draft order;\n\n9.\n[Further Directions]...\n\n Dated ______________\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 277\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020\nFAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS\n\n1. This Guidance, which is approved by the Chief Justice, is intended to\nbe followed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division.\nIt should be read in conjunction with (i) the Protocol \"COVID19:\nGuidance for the Family Division\" issued by the Chief Justice on 29\nMarch 2020.\n\n2. All family cases which have already been listed for a hearing will be\nlisted promptly for a directions hearing, which should be conducted\nremotely. The parties will be contacted and provided with the time and\ndate of the hearing. If a party is unable to attend the due date then they\nmust\npromptly\nnotify\nMs.\nSuzanne\nMiller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) and obtain a new\ndate convenient to all the parties.\n\n3. Any new hearing in a family case which is not listed on a Family\nMention Day will be listed promptly for a directions hearing. The\nparties will be contacted and provided with the time and date of the\nhearing. If a party is unable to attend the due date then they must\npromptly notify Ms. Suzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel:\n(345) 244 3883) and obtain a new date convenient to all the parties.\n\n4. The primary aim of the directions hearing will be to identify whether\nthe substantive hearing can be heard remotely. If it is unclear whether\nit can then, at the directions hearing, the Court will consider the optimal\nmethod of conducting the Court process in order to achieve a fair and\njust hearing of the issues but, at the same time, minimising as much as\npossible the degree of inter-personal contact between each participant.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 278\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n5.\nIf it decided at  the  directions  hearing  that  it  is  possible  to  make\narrangements  for the already fixed hearing to be  conducted  remote\nly,  then  the  hearing  should  go ahead remotely  without any  personal\nattendance  at  Court.  A draft directions   order is at Appendix A below.\n\n6.\nThe directions hearings and any hearings to be heard remotely will now\nbe dealt with remotely by Zoom. If you are unfamiliar with Zoom here\nis the help page from Zoom https:\/\/support.zoom.us\/he\/en-us\/a rticles\/\n206618765 -Zoom-Video-Tutorials and further guidance and video\nhttps:\/\/learninginbloom.com\/use-zoom\/.\n\n7.\nThe attorneys and any litigants in person will, well in advance of the\nhearing, be provided with details of the hearing and a link that they will\nneed to use to enable them to access the Zoom hearing. If they have not\nreceived these details then they should contact Ms. Suzanne Miller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883).\n\n8.\nIt is important that the parties are available to enter the Zoom hearing\nat the set time and that they be prepared to wait as there may be a delay\ncaused by a previous matter in the list overrunning. A Zoom connection\ntest\nshould\nbe\narranged\nwith\nMs.\nSuzanne\nMiller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of\nthe hear ing.\n\n9. Each litigant and their attorney can attend the Zoom hearing from\ndifferent locations. The screen will enable each person attending the\nmeeting to be seen and each attendee can be heard. The Court may\nuse the 'speaker view' in which the person speaking will appear as\nthe main image on the screen and the other attendees will appear in\nsm all individual boxes at the top of the screen. The Judge will lead\nthe meeting and will initially appear as the main image on screen.\nThe Judge will then invite the other attendees to speak in turn and\nwhen that person is speaking he\/she will appear as the main image\non the screen.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 279\n\n It is important that only one person speak at a time and only when\ninvited by the Judge to do so. The Court may also use the 'gallery view'\n\nin which each person will appear in an equal size box on the screen\nthroughout the hearing. At the start of the hearing, the Judge will\nrecommend, depending on the number of attendees, which view should\nbe used.\n\n10. If a party is unable to attend by Zoom because they do not have\nadequate internet access, the Court will arrange for that party to attend\nthe hearing by telephone. That attendee will be able to hear the other\nattendees speak and be able to speak during the hearing. At the time set\nfor the hearing, the party will need to dial 1-30171-58592 followed by\nthe meeting ID and the # sign. The attendee must contact Ms. Suzanne\nMiller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in\nadvance of the hearing if telephone attendance is sought in order for\nthem to be provided with the required meeting ID. A Zoom\/telephone\nconnection test should be arranged with Mrs. Suzanne Miller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of\nthe hearing.\n\n11. It is important that all litigants and attorneys ensure that Ms. Suzanne\nMiller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) is provided\nwith their up-to-date email and telephone details and promptly notified\nof any changes made to them.\n\n    29 March 2020\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 280\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020\nFAMILY DIVISION - REMOTE HEARINGS - FAMILY MENTION DAYS\n\n1.\nThis Guidance, which is approved by the Chief Justice, is intended to\nbe followed with immediate effect in the Grand Court Family Division.\nIt should be read in conjunction with (i) the Protocol \"COVID19:\nGuidance for the Family Division\"  issued by the  Chief Justice on 29\nMarch 2020 and (ii) Practice Direction No. 6\/2012 \"Listing of Family\nLaw Proceedings.\"\n\n2.\nThe days already allocated for Family Mention Days will remain.\nThese dates are 16 April, 17 April, 14 May, 15 May, 28 May, 29 May,\n1 June, 12 June, 25 June, 26 June 2020. All cases already listed on a\nFamily Mention Day will still be heard at the same time on the same\ndate. Additional cases will be added to the existing Family Mention\nDays and new Family Mention Days will be created.\n\n3.\nAll presently listed Family Mention Day cases and any cases added to\nthe Family Mention Day list will now be dealt with remotely by Zoom.\nIf you are unfamiliar with Zoom here is the help page from Zoom\nhttps:\/\/support.zoom.us\/ hc\/ en-us\/ articles\/206618765-Zoom-VideoTutorials\nand\nfurther\nguidance\nand\nvideo\nhttps:\/\/learning\ninbloom.com\/use-zoom\/.\n\n4.\nThe attorneys and any litigants in person will, well in advance of the\nhearing, be provided with details of the hearing and a link that they will\nneed to use to enable them to access the Zoom hearing. If they have not\nreceived these details then they should contact Ms. Suzanne Miller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 281\n\n5. It is important that the parties are available to enter the Zoom hearing\nat the set time and that they be prepared to wait as there may be a delay\ncaused by a previous matter in the list overrunning. A Zoom connection\ntest\nshould\nbe\narranged\nwith\nMs.\nSuzanne\nMiller\n(Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in advance of\nthe hearing.\n\n6. Each litigant and their attorney can attend the Zoom hearing from\ndifferent locations. The screen will enable each person attending the\nmeeting to be seen and each attendee can be heard. The Court may use\nthe 'speaker view' in which the person speaking will appear as the main\nimage on the screen and the other attendees will appear in small\nindividual boxes at the top of the screen. The Judge will lead the\nmeeting and will initially appear as the main image on screen. The\nJudge will then invite the other attendees to speak in turn and when that\nperson is speaking he\/she will appear as the main image on the screen.\nIt is import ant that only one person speak at a time and only when\ninvited by the Judge to do so. The Court may also use the 'gallery view'\nin which each person will appear in an equal size box on the screen\nthroughout the hearing. At the start of the hearing, the Judge will\nrecommend, depending on the number of attendees, which view should\nbe used.\n\n7. If a party is unable to attend by Zoom because they do not have\nadequate internet access, the Court will arrange for that party to attend\nthe hearing by telephone. That attendee will be able to hear the other\nattendees speak and be able to speak during the hearing. At the time set\nfor the hearing, the party will need to dial 1-30171-58592 followed by\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 282\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthe meeting ID number and the # sign. The attendee must contact Ms.\nSuzanne Miller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well\nin advance of the hearing if telephone attendance is sought, in order for\nthem to be provided with the required meeting ID number. A\nZoom\/telephone connection test should be arranged with Mrs. Suzanne\nMiller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) well in\nadvance of the hearing.\n\n8.\nIt is important that all litigants and attorneys ensure that Ms. Suzanne\nMiller (Suzanne.Miller@Judicial.ky tel: (345) 244 3883) is provided\nwith their up-to-date email and details and promptly notified of any\nchanges made to them.\n\n29 March 2020\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 283\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\nTHE USE OF E-MAILS FOR FILING AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES,\nCOURT SEALS AND STAMPS\n\nIn order to continue to provide access to justice while operating during the\nCovid -19 crisis, the Courts must use technology as much as possible.\n\nWhile seeking to comply with Court Rules for the filing of documents and\nthe creation of Court files, in particular Grand Court Rules (GCR) Order 63\nRules 2 and 3, already the Courts have introduced a form of e-filing by way\nof e-mails.\n\nWhile the Administration  works  towards  the  introduction  of  the\npermanent  e-filing  and  e-service platforms, many documents or categories\nof documents must now be received, by e-mail, processed and  authenticated\nelectronically by the  use  of  e-signatures,  e-seals  and  e-stamps.\n\nTo this end the administration has acquired a software called DigicertQuovadis which will be used to compile a database of authorised\nsignatures, the Court seals and date stamps, for application to documents\nwhich must be authenticated by signature, seal or stamp.\n\nThe software will be run on a dedicated on-site Court server where the\ndocuments will be kept after signing, sealing or stamping before filing and\nuploading to the Courts' JEMS or Criminal Registry platforms.\n\nThe original code or  \"hash\"  for  each  signature,  seal  or  stamp  will  be\nstored  for  security  purposes, with Digicert-Quovadis for such time as\ndeemed necessary, anticipated now to be six months.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 284\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nAuthorised signatures, seals and stamps must not be misapplied and so must\nbe used only by those who are respectively authorised. To ensure this,\naccess to the database will be encrypted and password-protected.\n\nIt follows that specimen signatures will be required from each authorised\nsignatory for the creation of individual hashes. Once this database of\nsignatures, seals and stamps is compiled and secured they may  then  be\nused  for  the  authentication  of  documents  as  the  case  or situation may\nrequire.\n\nThe overarching purpose is to administer the authentication and  record\nkeeping  processes electronically without the  need  to  print  documents\nfor  the  purpose  of  signing,  sealing  or stamping.\n\nFollowing are the Practice Directions for the Application of Authorised\nSignatures, Seals and Stamps.\n\n1.\nUpon receipt of a document as an attachment to an email, the document\nwill be downloaded to the dedicated server by the staff of the Registry\nto which it is directed.\n\n2.\nThe payment of fees contingent upon the filing of the document must\nbe verified.\n\n3.\nThe document will then be forwarded to the authorised officer or\nsignatory for processing.\n\n4.\nFor instance, if the document is a writ, plaint or other originating\nprocess, it will be initially reviewed and processed by Registry staff\nshould the signature of the Clerk of Courts be required, then the\ndocument would be referred to the Clerk or  Deputy Clerk of  Court\nwho will apply the e-signature as necessary. The Registry staff will\naffix the appropriate Court seal and date stamp, evidencing the official\nreceipt of the document as a record of the Court.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 285\n\n5. In keeping with GCR Order 63, Rule 2, the Clerk of Court  [or\ndesignate]  shall create an electronic Court file of every proceeding by\nassigning the Cause Number and by placing the writ, plaint or other\noriginating pleading on the file  immediately  prior  to  issuing  the\npleading by which the proceeding is commenced.\n\n6. An electronic copy of the authenticated pleading will then be issued by\nreturn to the filer who will then be able to serve it on a respondent, with\nproof of service to come in the first instance electronically by affidavit.\n\n7. Acknowledgements of service will also be accepted electronically,\nsealed and date stamped and placed upon the respective Court file.\n\n8. In keeping with GCR Order 41 Rule 9 every affidavit used in a cause\nor matter proceeding in the Court must be filed. This must also be done\nelectronically in the first instance.\n\n9. The foregoing must be in keeping with GCR Order 63, Rule 3(1), which\ndirects that every document required to be filed in any proceeding must\nbe placed on the Court file relating to such proceeding and sealed with\na seal showing the date upon which the document was filed.\n\n10. In keeping with GCR Order 63 Rules 7 and 8, the Clerk of Courts shall\nplace [or caused to be placed] a copy of every judgment, order, writ  or\nother  originating  process  upon  the registers of judgments, orders,\nwrits and other originating process (unless otherwise ordered by the\nCourt).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 286\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n11. If the document is a charge or indictment, it will be received by the\nCriminal Registry, sealed and stamped and a copy returned to the office\nof the DPP (ODPP). The criminal case file will be opened with the\nofficial document  and  where  appropriate  in  the  case  of  a  charge,\nsummons , issued accordingly. See attached draft protocol to be agreed\nwith the ODPP.\n\n12. In keeping with GCR Order 42 if the document is a draft order or\ndefault judgment, it will be sealed and date stamped upon receipt\nelectronically and sent to the respective Judge, Magistrate or to the\nClerk of Court (as the case might be) for e-signing and return to the\nRegistry. The date of the order or default judgment will then be inserted\nand the order placed on the respective Court file and register of orders\nand judgments. An electronic copy will then be returned to the filer (for\nservice if necessary with the leave of the Court pursuant to GCR Order\n65).\n\n13. When finally approved and signed for issuance and publication,\noriginal judgments will, in keeping with GCR Order 42 rule 7(1) be\nplaced upon the respective Court file. Electronic copies will be\nuploaded to the register of judgments and orders before being issued.\nWhen issued they will also be uploaded to the website (unless\npublication is embargoed by order of the Judge)\n\n14. GCR Order 63 does require the creation and maintenance of hard copy\nfile s and registers. Accordingly, until such time as the permanent efiling and e-service platforms become operational, and although\ndocuments received and processed in keeping with this Practice\nDirection will become records of the Court, the original hard copies are\nrequired to be filed with the Registry as soon as business returns to\nnormal on a date to be announced.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 287\n\n15. Protocols have for some time been in place for the e-filing of social\ninquiry reports and related documents by the Department of\nCommunity Rehabilitation and for the e-filing of tickets issued by the\nDepartment of Commerce and Investment. These are also attached. A\nnew protocol for e-filing of reports by the Department of Children and\nFamily Services will now be issued in the form also attached.\n\n16. In relation to admissions pursuant to Legal Practitioners Act (as\namended and revised), sections 3(1) and s.4 (1) and Practice Direction\n4 of 2012, affidavits that are to be sworn before the Clerk of Court will\nbe taken by Zoom appearance and thereafter the Court seal and esignature of the Clerk of Court can be affixed to the affidavit and\nprovided to the filer electronically, and uploading to the Courts' JEMS\nor Civil Registry platform.\n\n17.  Formatting: docments must be formatted as they would for\nconventional filing.\n\n6 April 2020\n\n(4 enclosures - Practice Directions 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D of 2020)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 288\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT\nSYSTEM (JEMS) - FAMILY REGISTRY\nELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS\n\nFROM THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES\n(DCFS)\n\nOBJECTIVE:\nTo deliver reports, electronically to the Courts in respect of Summary and\nGrand Courts in order to facilitate timely receipt and accessibility by the\njudiciary, attorneys, parties and relevant agencies.\n\nJEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it\nallows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system\nto authorised users.\n\nBENEFITS:\n\n\u25ba\nTo provide reports to the judiciary in advance of hearing.\n\n\u25ba\nTo allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those\nwith authorised access only.\n\n\u25ba\nTo ensure faster response time in processing reports.\n\n\u25ba\nReduce attendance of DCFS personnel at front counter filing\nreports.\n\n\u25ba\nAllow PA to print reports for judges or magistrates in advance\nof hearing.\n\nINDEX\n1. Authority\n2. Effective Date\n3. Electronic Filing Case Types\n4. Definitions\n5. Method of Filing\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 289\n\n6. Privacy Issues\n7. Format of Documents\n8. System or User Errors\n\n1.\nAUTHORITY\nElectronic filing of court reports is achieved by lodging reports\nelectronically to the Family Proceedings Unit of Judicial Administration in\naccordance with Standards and Principles established by the Clerk of Court\nwith the approval of the Chief Justice.\n\n2.\nEFFECTIVE DATE\nThe electronic filing of the reports described below is effective as of the 6th\nApril 2020 until further notice.\n\n3.\nELECTRONIC FILING REPORT TYPES\nA. The Clerk of Court with the approval of the Chief Justice hereby\nauthorises the filing electronically of the reports described in B\nbelow. From time-to-time, additional documents may be\nauthorised to be processed in this way. Documents filed previously\nin the conventional manner will be scanned and included in the\nelectronic case file.\n\nB. The following documents may be filed electronically:\n1.\nCase Status Reports\n2.\nOther reports from DCFS in r elation to Care Matters;\n3.\nDomestic Violence cases, Family Cases, Divorce Matters,\nAdoption matters and Welfare Reports that relate to Summary\nCourt, Civil Maintenance and Grand Court Civil matters.\n\nthat relate to:\n(a) Summary Court (Civil)\n(b) Grand Court (civil - indictment)\n(c) Youth Court (civil)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 290\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(d) Drug Court\n\n4.\nDEFINITIONS\n\nThe following terms are defined as follows:\nA. Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents\nwith the Civil\/ Family Registry.\nB. Electronic Document (\"e-document\") - An electronic file\ncontaining informational text.\nC. Electronic Filing (\"e-file\") - An electronic transmission of\ninformation between the Department and Judicial Administration.\nD. Electronic Image (\"e-image\") - An electronic representation of a\ndocument that has been transformed to a graphical or image\nformat.\nE. Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all\nfonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document\nregardless of the application platform used.\nF.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the\nreports covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Civil\nRegistry and Family Proceedings Unit (\u201cFPU\u201d) of the Judicial\nAdministration, DCFS, the parties, the attorney acting in an\nindividual case to which the report relates and any other relevant\nexternal agency. Other subscribers may be added by the Clerk of\nCourt (after consultation with the DCFS) having regard for the\nprotection of confidential information.\n\n5.\nMETHOD OF FILING\n\uf0d8 DCFS to e-file report to Judicial Administration through FTP Server\nby scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial\nadministration system (this should be at least 36 working hours\nbefore the court hearing date).\n\uf0d8 In sending the scan, DCFS must include the proper case number\n(e.g. FAM 0001\/2014 or (for Summary Court) SMA0198\/2014\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 291\n\n(preceded by BC or BT for Brac Courts)) as part of the scanning\nreference entered into the machine from which the document is\nscanned:\no Reports transmitted without a case number as the reference will\nbe rejected.\no Reports that do not contain on the first page clear reference to\nthe case number and the hearing date will be rejected.\n\uf0d8 Civil Registry or Family Proceedings Unit staff will check the folder\neach working day before 9:00 am. and upload any report to JEMS\nwith the e-sealing certification and date stamp (there is an\naccompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff).\n\uf0d8 Civil Registry\/Family Proceedings Unit staff will forward the report\nto the Judge\/Magistrate, any attorney identified in the JEMs records\nand\/or the parties themselves.\n\uf0d8 Civil Registry and Family Proceedings staff will create an e-record\nof the report, date stamp and e-seal and upload in JEMs, and place\nit in the court file.\n\uf0d8 Once in JEMS, reports can be viewed and printed (if needed) by PA\nto the Judge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate themselves).\n\uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the\nfolder into which the report will be scanned in order to view reports\nnot yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the court where\nit is sent after 9:00am) and to print them but must not delete the\nreport from the folder.\n6.\nPRIVACY ISSUES\nSince these reports contain personal information, they will be set up within\nJEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised\npersonnel) (see 4F above).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 292\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n7.\nFORMAT OF DOCUMENTS\nAll uploaded reports created by word processing programs must be\nformatted as follows:\n(a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11\npoint font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognized\nas the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for\nthose viewing the reports within JEMS);\n(b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font;\n(c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter);\n(d) the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm);\n(e) the top right 2\" x 2\" corner of the first page of each Report must\nbe left blank  -  this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp\nto be applied without concealing text;\n(f) each report must include:\na.\nthe hearing date,\nb. the parties' name,\nc.\nthe case number,\nd. the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number\nof the person filing the report .\n\nThe maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed documents\nis currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient for almost all\nreports.\n\nIf a report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the report should\ncontact the Supervisor of the Civil Registry or the Family Unit to decide\nhow to proceed. If necessary a facility such as WeTransfer (wetransfer.com)\nmay need to be used.\n\n8.\nSYSTEM OR USER ERRORS\nInevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration\nis committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5A OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 293\n\nelectronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in\nimplementing this procedure.\n\nIf a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS\nsystem or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Clerk of\nCourt for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration Network and\nIT Department. Unless exceptionally urgent, this should be a written\ndescription of the problem.\n\nIf a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed\nunder this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial\nAdministration will be the Supervisor of the Civil Registry\/Family\nProceedings Unit or, in their absence, the Senior Deputy Clerk of Court,\nMs. Jenesha Simpson and for DCFS it will be the Senior DCFS Social Case\nManager.\n\nShiona Allenger\nClerk of Court\nIssued by approval of the Chief Justice on 6 April 2020.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 294\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT\nSYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY\nELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS FROM THE OFFICE OF\nTHE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (ODPP)\n\nOBJECTIVE:\nTo deliver documents for the Grand and Summary Courts (Criminal)\nelectronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary.\n\nJEMS is the Judicial Administration\u2019s Electronic Management System; it\nallows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system\nto authorised users.\n\nBENEFITS:\n\uf0d8 To provide electronic documents to the judiciary in advance of\nhearing.\n\uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with\nauthorised access only.\n\uf0d8 To ensure bundles are not misplaced and are always available.\n\uf0d8 Allow PA to print documents for judges in advance of hearing.\n\nINDEX\n1. Authority\n2. Effective Date\n3. Electronic Filing Case Types\n4. Definitions\n5. Method of Filing\n6. Privacy Issues\n7. Format of Documents\n8. System or User Errors\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 295\n\n1 AUTHORITY\nElectronic filing of Court documents is conducted by lodging documents\nwith the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with\nStandards and Principles established by the Court Administrator with the\napproval of the Chief Justice.\n\n2 EFFECTIVE DATE\nThe Electronic filing of the documents described below is effective from\nthe 1st May 2018 until further notice.\n\n3 ELECTRONIC FILING DOCUMENT TYPES\nA.  The Court Administrator hereby authorises the filing electronically of\nthe documents described in B below. From time-to-time, additional\ndocuments may be authorised to be processed in this way.\nB.  The following documents may be filed electronically:\n1. Indictments\n2. Charges\n3. Trial Bundles (and NAEs)\n4. Sentencing Bundles\n5. Submissions Bundles\n6. Other documents, as required that relate to:\na. Grand Court (Criminal)\nb. Summary Courts (Criminal)\n\n4 DEFINITIONS\nThe following terms are defined as follows:\nA.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents with the\nCriminal Registry.\nB.  Electronic Document (\"e-document\") - An electronic file containing\ninformational text.\nC.  Electronic Filing (\"e-file\") - An electronic transmission of information\nbetween the Department and Judicial Administration\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 296\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nD.  Electronic Image (\"e-image\") - An electronic representation of a\ndocument that has been transformed to a graphical or image format.\nE.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all\nfonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document\nregardless of the application platform used.\nF.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the reports\ncovered by this authority, this will be staff of the Criminal Registry of\nthe Judicial Administration and the Office of the Director of Public\nProsecution (ODPP). Other subscribers may be added by the Court\nAdministrator (after consultation with the ODPP) having regard for the\nprotection of confidential information.\n\n5 METHOD OF FILING\n\uf0d8 ODPP to e-file report to Judicial Administration through SFTP or\nDropBox by scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial\nadministration system.\n\uf0d8 In sending the scan, ODPP must include the proper case number\n(e.g. IND 0013\/2014) as part of the scanning reference entered into\nthe machine from which the document is scanned;\no Documents transmitted without a case number as the reference\nwill be rejected.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day\nbefore 9am and upload any documents to JEMS (there is an\naccompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff.\n\uf0d8 If a document is urgent the document should be scanned in the\nnormal manner and an email should be sent to the Deputy Clerk of\nCourt and the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry as well as the PA\nto the Judge to ensure the document is accessed by the court.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will print the documents, date stamp it and\nplace it in the Court file.\n\uf0d8 Once in JEMS, documents can be viewed and printed by PA to the\nJudge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate themselves).\n\uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the\nfolder into which the report will be scanned in order to view\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 297\n\ndocuments not yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the\nCourt where it is sent after 9am) and to print them but must not\ndelete the report from the folder.\n\uf0d8 Documents will be \u2018filed\u2019 at Court at the date and time the\ndocuments were sent to the FTP or DropBox.\n\n6 PRIVACY ISSUES\nSince these reports contain personal information, they will be set up within\nJEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised\npersonnel) (see 4F above).\n\n7 FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS\nAll uploaded reports created by word processing programs must be\nformatted as follows:\n(a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11 point\nfont ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognized as the\nclearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for those viewing\nthe reports within JEMS);\n(b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font;\n(c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter);\n(d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm);\n(e)  the top right 2\" x 2\" corner of the first page of each Report must be left\nblank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to be applied\nwithout concealing text;\n(f)  each report must include:\na.  the hearing date,\nb.  the defendant\u2019s name,\nc.  the case number ,\nd.  the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number of the\nperson filing the report.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5B OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 298\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n8 SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS\nInevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial Administration\nis committed to working with other subscribers to maximise the benefits of\nelectronic filing and will do all that it can to support subscribers in\nimplementing this procedure.\n\nIf a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS\nsystem of the SFTP or DropBox process, it will be referred initially to\nITALERTS at ITALERTS@Judicial.ky for onward transmission to the\nJudicial Administration Network and IT Department. Unless exceptionally\nurgent, this should be a written description of the problem.\n\nIf a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed\nunder this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial\nAdministration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or, in their\nabsence, the Deputy Clerk of the Court and for ODPP it will be the Case\nManager.\n\nShiona Allenger\nClerk of Court\nIssued by approval of the Chief Justice on Date\n\nUpdated 21st May 2020\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 299\n\n GRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT\nSYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY\nELECTRONIC FILING OF COURT REPORTS FROM THE\nDEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY REHABILITATION (DCR)\n\nOBJECTIVE:\nTo deliver reports for the Summary and Grand Courts (Criminal)\nelectronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary,\nprosecuting and defence attorneys and to staff of the relevant agencies.\n\nJEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it\nallows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system\nto authorised users.\n\nBENEFITS:\n\uf0d8 To provide reports to the judiciary in advance of hearing.\n\uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with\nauthorised access only.\n\uf0d8 To ensure faster response time in processing reports.\n\uf0d8 Reduce attendance of DCR personnel at front counter filing reports.\n\uf0d8 Allow PA to print reports for judges or magistrates in advance of\nhearing.\n\nINDEX\n1. Authority\n2. Effective Date\n3. Electronic Filing Case Types\n4. Definitions\n5. Method of Filing\n6. Privacy Issues\n7. Format of Documents\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 300\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n8. System or User Errors\n\n1. AUTHORITY\n\nElectronic filing of court reports is conducted by lodging reports with\nthe Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with\nStandards and Principles established by the Court Administrator with\nthe approval of the Chief Justice.\n\n2. EFFECTIVE DATE\n\nThe Electronic filing of the reports described below is effective from\nthe 1st July 2015 until further order.\n\n3. ELECTRONIC FILING REPORT TYPES\nA.  The Court Administrator with the approval of the Chief Justice\nhereby authorises the filing electronically of the reports described\nin B below. From time to time, additional documents may be\nauthorised to be processed in this way. Documents filed previously\nin the conventional manner will be scanned and included in the\nelectronic case file.\nB. The following documents may be filed electronically:\n1.  Social Inquiry Reports (SIRs)\n2.  Case Status Reports (i.e. reports indicating that an SIR will\nnot be available as ordered)\n3.  Other reports from DCR relating to those appearing in the\nDrug Rehabilitation Court that relate to:\n(a)  Summary Court (Criminal)\n(b)  Grand Court (criminal \u2013 indictment)\n(c)  Youth Court (criminal)\n(d)  Drug Court\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 301\n\n4. DEFINITIONS\n\nThe following terms are defined as follows:\nA.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents\nwith the Criminal Registry.\nB.  Electronic Document (\"e-document\") - An electronic file\ncontaining informational text.\nC. Electronic Filing (\"e-file\") - An electronic transmission of\ninformation between the Department and Judicial Administration.\nD.  Electronic Image (\"e-image\") - An electronic representation of a\ndocument that has been transformed to a graphical or image\nformat.\nE.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all\nfonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document\nregardless of the application platform used.\nF.  Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the\nreports covered by this authority, this will be staff of the Criminal\nRegistry of the Judicial Administration, the defence attorney\nacting in an individual case to which the report relates and the\nOffice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). Other\nsubscribers may be added by the Court Administrator (after\nconsultation with the DCR) having regard for the protection of\nconfidential information.\n\n5. METHOD OF FILING\n\uf0d8 DCR to e-file report to Judicial Administration through FTP Server\nby scanning the report to a folder identified on the judicial\nadministration system (this should be at least 36 working hours\nbefore the court hearing date).\n\uf0d8 In sending the scan, DCR must include the proper case number (e.g.\nIND 0013\/2014 or (for summary court) 0198\/2014 (preceded by BC\nor BT for Brac Courts)) as part of the scanning reference entered\ninto the machine from which the document is scanned:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 302\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\no Reports transmitted without a case number as the reference\nwill be rejected.\no Reports that do not contain on the first page clear reference\nto the case number and the hearing date will be rejected.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day\nbefore 9am and upload any report to JEMS (there is an\naccompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff).\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will forward the report to the ODPP and to\nany defence attorney identified in the JEMS record.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will seal and date stamp the Report\nelectronically and place it in the JEMS court file.\n\uf0d8 Once in JEMS, Reports can be viewed and printed (if needed) by\nPA to the Judge or Magistrate (or the Judge or Magistrate\nthemselves).\n\uf0d8 The PAs to Judges and Magistrates will also be able to access the\nfolder into which the Report will be scanned in order to view reports\nnot yet uploaded into JEMS (i.e. on the day sent to the court where\nit is sent after 9am) and to print them but must not delete the Report\nfrom the folder.\n\n6. PRIVACY ISSUES\nSince these Reports contain personal information, they will be set up within\nJEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e. authorised\npersonnel) (see 4F above).\n\n7. FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS\n\nAll uploaded Reports created by word processing programs must be\nformatted as follows:\n(a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11\npoint font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognised\nas the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for\nthose viewing the reports within JEMS)\n(b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 303\n\n(c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter);\n(d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm);\n(e)  the top right 2\" x 2\" corner of the first page of each Report must\nbe left blank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp\nto be applied without concealing text;\n(f)  each Report must include:\na.  the hearing date,\nb.  the defendant\u2019s name,\nc.  the case number,\nd.  the name, physical and e-mail address and telephone number\nof the person filing the Report.\n\nThe maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed\ndocuments is currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient\nfor almost all reports.\n\nIf a Report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the Report\nshould contact the Deputy Clerk of Court or the Supervisor of the\nCriminal Registry to decide how to proceed. If necessary a facility such\nas WeTransfer (wetransfer.com) may need to be used.\n\n8. SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS\n\nInevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial\nAdministration is committed to working with other subscribers to\nmaximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to\nsupport subscribers in implementing this procedure.\n\nIf a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS\nsystem or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Court\nAdministrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration\nNetwork and IT Manager (Andrew Doussept). Unless exceptionally\nurgent, this should be a written description of the problem.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5C OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 304\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nIf a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed\nunder this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial\nAdministration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal registry or, in\ntheir absence, the Deputy Clerk of Court, Ms. Cecile Collins and for\nDCR it will be case manager assigned to the case.\n\nKevin McCormac\nCourt Administrator\n\nJune 2015\nReissued on 6 April 2020 on direction of the Chief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 305\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT\nSYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY\nELECTRONIC FILING OF TICKETS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF\nCOMMERCE AND INVESTMENT\n\nOBJECTIVE:\nTo receive and register electronically delinquent ticketable offences from\nthe Department of Commerce and Investment (DCI) within (48) forty-eight\nhours of every ticket that remains unpaid.\n\nJEMS is the Judicial Administration's Electronic Management System; it\nallows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system\nto authorised users.\n\nBENEFITS:\n\uf0d8 Allow ticket to be viewed conveniently on JEMS.\n\uf0d8 To ensure timely receipt of tickets.\n\uf0d8 Reduce attendance of Field officers from DCI at front counter\nfiling tickets.\n\nINDEX\n1. Authority\n2. Effective Date\n3. Electronic Filing\n4. Method of Filing\n5. System or User Errors\n\n1  AUTHORITY\n\nElectronic filing of DCI tickets is conducted by lodging tickets with\nthe Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in accordance with\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 306\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\ntemplates established by the Clerk of Courts with the approval of the\nChiefJustice and the DCI.\n\n2\nEFFECTIVE DATE\n\nThe Electronic filing of the DCI tickets described below has been\neffective from the 1st September 2015 until further order.\n\n3\nELECTRONIC FILING\nA. The Clerk of Courts hereby authorises the filing electronically of\ntickets described in B below.\n\nFrom time to time, additional documents may be authorised to be\nprocessed in this way. Documents filed previously in the\nconventional manner will be scanned and included in the electronic\ncase file.\nB. The following may be filed electronically:\n1. Fixed penalties tickets\n2. Summonses\n\nthat relate to:\n\n(a) Summary Court\n\n4\nMETHOD OF FILING\n\nMethod 1\u2014 Delinquent tickets\n\uf0d8 DCI to scan delinquent ticket and summons to Judicial\nAdministration in accordance with the template through FTP Server\nby scanning the items in B above to a folder identified on the judicial\nadministration system within (48) forty-eight hours.\no The court has responsibility to schedule the tickets for\nmention on the following first available mention Tuesday.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check ticket folder each working day\nbefore 9am and print ticket for registration.\n\uf0d8 DCI ticket must include the date of birth (only if the ticket is in the\nname of a business, the date of birth will not be required).\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 307\n\n\uf0d8 As soon as practicable after receipt of a Delinquent ticket and\nsummons, documents are to be registered into JEMS.\n\uf0d8 Upon registration a court date will be fixed and copy of ticket and\nsummons will be provided to the Office of Public Prosecution.\n\uf0d8 A copy of the summons will also be issued to RCIPS for service on\nthe company\/defendant.\n\nMethod 2 \u2013 Not Guilty plea entered\n\uf0d8 Where a \u201cnot guilty\u201d plea is entered, the company or individual\nwithin 28 days must notify the Summary Court.\no Notification by company or individual of not guilty plea\nshould be scheduled by the Registry for the first mention\nTuesday.\n\uf0d8 Ticket is registered and a Court date is provided to the Company or\nindividual. Ticket and summons for Court date are sent to the Office\nof Public Prosecution.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check ticket folder each working day\nbefore 9am and upload any tickets to JEMS (there is an\naccompanying \u201chow to\u201d document for Registry staff);\n\uf0d8 In sending the ticket, DCI ticket must include the date of birth\n(except of course if the ticket is in the name of a business, date of\nbirth will not be required). Tickets will be rejected without a date of\nbirth.\n\uf0d8 As soon as practicable after delinquent and \u201cnot guilty\u201d tickets are\ne-filed, tickets are to be entered in JEMS.\n\uf0d8 Delinquent tickets and \u201cnot guilty\u201d tickets after registration will be\nreturned to DCI and ODPP by e-filing.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will print the ticket, date stamp it and create\na file for the Court.\n\n5  SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS\n\nInevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial\nAdministration is committed to working with other subscribers to\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5D OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 308\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nmaximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to\nsupport subscribers in implementing this procedure.\n\nIf a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the JEMS\nsystem or the scanning process, it will be referred initially to the Court\nAdministrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration\nNetwork and IT Manager. Unless exceptionally urgent, there should be\na written description of the problem.\n\nIf a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed\nunder this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial\nAdministration will be the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or, in\ntheir absence, the Deputy Clerk of Court.\n\nIn the event that a problem arises that cannot be resolved immediately\nfor a ticket to be e-filed, the DCI will revert to the submission of tickets\nby hand to the criminal registry but must call the criminal registry\nbeforehand for an appointment.\n\nKevin McCormac\nCourt Administrator\nJuly 2015\nReissued as updated on 6 Apr 2020.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 309\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\nCAYMAN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CASE MANAGEMENT\nSYSTEM (JEMS) - CRIMINAL REGISTRY\nELECTRONIC FILING OF CHARGES REPORTS\nFROM THE ROYAL CAYMAN ISLANDS POLICE SERVICES (RCIPS)\n\nOBJECTIVE:\nTo deliver documents for the Grand Court and Summary Court (Criminal)\nelectronically in a way that makes them quickly accessible to judiciary.\n\nJEMS is the Judicial Administration\u2019s Electronic Management System; it\nallows for electronic filing and viewing of documents stored in the system\nto authorised users.\n\nBENEFITS:\n\uf0d8 To provide electronic documents to the judiciary in advance of\nhearing.\n\uf0d8 To allow image to be viewed conveniently on JEMS by those with\nauthorised access only.\n\uf0d8 To ensure charges are received before the bail dates.\n\uf0d8 To allow electronic signature by Justice of the Peace\n\nINDEX\n1. Authority\n2. Effective Date\n3. Electronic Filing Case Types\n4. Definitions\n5. Method of Filing\n6. Privacy Issues\n7. Format of Documents\n8. System or User Errors\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 310\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n1.  AUTHORITY\n\nElectronic filing of court documents is conducted by lodging\ndocuments with the Criminal Registry of Judicial Administration in\naccordance with Standards and Principles established by the Court\nAdministrator with the approval of the Chief Justice.\n\n2.  EFFECTIVE DATE\n\nThe Electronic filing of the documents described below is effective\nfrom the May 21, 2020 until further order.\n\n3.  ELECTRONIC FILING DOCUMENT TYPES\nA.  The Court Administrator hereby authorises the filing electronically\nof the documents described in B below. From time to time,\nadditional documents may be authorised to be processed in this\nway.\nB.  The following documents may be filed electronically:-\n1.  Charges\/indictments etc\n2.  Summons\n3.  Tickets\n4.  Bail Bonds\n5.  Summary of Facts\n6.  Summonses\n7.  Breach of bail report\n8.  Executed warrant\n9.  Summons to Medical Practitioner (Coroner)\n10.  Other documents, as required.\n\nthat relate to: \u2014\n(a)  Grand Court (Criminal)\n(b)  Summary Court (Criminal)\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 311\n\n(c)  Coroners Court\n(d)  Drug Rehabilitation Court\n(e)  Mental Health Court\n(f)  Special Domestic Violence Court\n(g)  Youth Court\n\n4.  DEFINITIONS\n\nThe following terms are defined as follows:-\nA.  Conventional manner of filing - The filing of paper documents\nwith the Criminal Registry.\nB.  Electronic Document (\"e-document\") - An electronic file\ncontaining informational text.\nC. Electronic Filing (\"e-file\") - An electronic transmission of\ninformation between the Department and Judicial Administration.\nD.  Electronic Image (\"e-image\") - An electronic representation of a\ndocument that has been transformed to a graphical or image\nformat.\nF.  Portable Document Format (PDF) - A file format that preserves all\nfonts, formatting colors and graphics of any source document\nregardless of the application platform used.\nG. Subscriber - One contracting to use the E-Filing system. For the\ndocuments covered by this authority, this will be staff of the\nCriminal Registry of the Judicial Administration and the Royal\nCaymans Islands Police Service (RCIPS). Other subscribers may\nbe added by the Court Administrator having regard for the\nprotection of confidential information.\n\n5.  METHOD OF FILING\n\uf0d8 RCIPS to e-file documents to Judicial Administration through SFTP\nor DropBox by sharing the documents to the appropriate folder\nidentified on the SFTP or DropBox folder on the server of judicial\nadministration system.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 312\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n\uf0d8 In keeping with provisions of section 14(3) of the Criminal\nProcedure Code (as amended and revised), charges must be duly\nsigned by a police officer when filing by drop box and must be\nreviewed and signed by a Justice of the Peace, in exercise of the\npowers conferred by Section 14(3) of the Law and shall also be read,\nas circumstances require. This completes the process of filing.\n\uf0d8 In sharing a charge document by an enforcement agency -\n1. If a charge\/summons is filed the following must be specific:\n\u2022\nIf defendant is Agencies in Custody, bail or to be summonsed\n\u2022\nDefendant\u2019s full name and physical address\n\u2022\nEmail address, if any (essential)\n\u2022\nContact number (essential)\n\u2022\nNationality\n2. Other agencies filing documents must specify:\n\u2022\nA case number on the document\n\u2022\nInformation set out in 5(1) above.\n\nThe Case number must be visible to the user without having to open the\ndocument as part of the sharing reference entered into the SFTP or DropBox\nfolder from which the document is uploaded;\n\uf0d8 Documents transmitted without an indication of a specific reference\nof bail, custody, summons and a signature will be rejected.\n\uf0d8 Criminal Registry staff will check the folder each working day\nbefore 9:00 am and upload any documents requiring signature to a\nJustice of the Peace.\n\uf0d8 If a document is urgent the document should not be shared in the\nnormal way as stated above, an email marked \u201curgent\u201d should be\nsent to criminalregistry@judicial.ky to notify staff of the urgent\ncourt. Unless you provide an email notification the document may\nnot be processed until after 3 p.m.\n\uf0d8 Documents sent to the Judicial server will be downloaded to apply\nthe court seal and a Justice of the Peace signature as required on a\ncharge document.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 313\n\n\uf0d8 Where a seal and signature has been applied, a JP\u2019s electronic\nsignature, Criminal Registry staff will register the charge by giving\na number.\n\uf0d8 The number for each charge filed will be provided in a JEMS filing\nreport to accompany the charge document.\n\uf0d8 Agencies must apply the number to the charges as assigned in the\nreport to the DPP SFTP or DropBox Folder of the appropriate\nagency and RCIPS SFTP or DropBox Folder along with the case\nnumber in the reference, the sealed file will trigger the creation of a\ncourt file, date stamp charge electronically with court seal according\nto the date received and place documents in the court\u2019s file pending\nhearing.\n\uf0d8 Once in JEMS, documents can be viewed and printed by staff with\nauthorisation to view and print from JEMS.\n\uf0d8 To avoid duplicate uploading and printing of documents, only\npersons with access to the SFTP or DropBox folder will be allowed\nto print documents shared within the folder. Staff will archive\ndocuments from folder when uploaded within 14 days.\n\uf0d8 Documents uploaded by staff must be deleted from SFTP or\nDropBox immediately after uploading to avoid duplicate\nregistration and uploading of documents.\n\uf0d8 Documents will be \u2018filed\u2019 and date stamped by court at the date and\ntime the documents were sent to the SFTP or DropBox Folder on\nthe Server.\n\n6.  PRIVACY ISSUES\n\nSince these documents contain personal information, they will be set\nup within JEMS so that they can be viewed only by subscribers (i.e.\nauthorised personnel) (see 4G above).\n\n7.  FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS\n\nAll uploaded documents created by word processing programs must be\nformatted as follows:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 314\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(a)  the size of the type in the body of the text must be no less than 11\npoint font ideally Calibri or Arial as these are widely recognised\nas the clearest fonts \u2013 clarity will be particularly important for\nthose viewing the reports within JEMS)\n(b)  where footnotes are used, these should be no less than 8 point font;\n(c)  the size of the page must be 8-1\/2 by 11 inches (i.e. letter);\n(d)  the margins on each side of the page should be 1 inch (2.4cm);\n(e)  the top right 2\"x 2\" corner of the first page of each Report must be\nleft blank \u2013 this will allow the Clerk of the Court's date stamp to\nbe applied without concealing text;\n(f)  each document must include:\na.  the hearing date, if bailed\nb.  the defendant\u2019s full name, (First-middle-last)\nc.  Date of birth,\nd.  Nationality\ne.  Physical Address,\nf.  E-mail address and telephone number of the person filing the\nreport\ng.  Offence(s)\nh.  Particulars of offence\ni.  Case number, if any\n\nThe maximum file size for the submission of electronically filed\ndocuments is currently 8 MB; this is likely to be more than sufficient\nfor almost all reports.\n\nIf a report is too large to transmit, the person seeking to file the report\nshould contact the Supervisor of the Criminal Registry or the Deputy\nClerk of Court to decide how to proceed.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5E OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 315\n\n8.  SYSTEM OR USER ERRORS\n\nInevitably problems will arise in using this system. Judicial\nAdministration is committed to working with other subscribers to\nmaximise the benefits of electronic filing and will do all that it can to\nsupport subscribers in implementing this procedure.\n\nIf a problem appears to arise from the technical operation of the SFTP\nor DropBox process, it will be referred initially to the Court\nAdministrator for onward transmission to the Judicial Administration\nNetwork and IT Manager (Andrew Doussept). Unless exceptionally\nurgent, this should be a written description of the problem.\n\nIf a problem arises from the receipt or management of documents filed\nunder this procedure, the primary point of contact for Judicial\nAdministration will be the Clerk of Court or a Deputy Clerk of Court.\nIn their absence, the Supervisor of the Criminal registry at\ncriminalregistry@judicial.ky and for RCIPs it will be the RCIPS at\nRCIPS.process@gov.ky.\n\nSuzanne Bothwell\nCourt Administrator\nIssued by approval of the Chief Justice on May 21, 2020\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 316\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION\nMODIFYING STANDARD REMOTE HEARING PRACTICE DURING\nCORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE\n\nIntroductory\n1.  On March 28, 2020, the Chief Justice issued a Press Release entitled\n\u2018The Courts\u2019 response to the Shelter in Place Regulations\u2019:\nwww.judicial.ky. In relation to the Financial Services Division\n(\u201cFSD\u201d), it was stated that:\n\u201c \u2022  In the FSD the use of video-conferencing and teleconferencing will\nbe encouraged and implemented where possible. The practice is\nparticularly well established in the FSD where Judges frequently\npreside over interlocutory proceedings in Court from the UK (and\nother places) by video-link. However, given the travel bans, it now\nseems likely that substantive trials will also have to be taken by\nthese means as much as possible, even where the designated judge\nresides overseas.\n\u2022\nAnd so, in keeping with Grand Court Rules Order 33 rule 1, the\nSecretary of State for Foreign Affairs has confirmed, through the\nOffice of the Governor that he consents to Grand Court judges\npresiding from the UK for trials in Cayman by way of video-link.\nUpdated Practice Directions on Video-link Proceedings will be\nissued shortly.\n\u2022\nParties and their attorneys are advised to contact the FSD\nRegistrar and\/or Listing Officer to identify those cases which must\nproceed by way of video-link and to confirm the arrangements with\nthe\ndesignated\nJudges:\nbridget.myers@judicial.ky\nor\nyasmin.ebanks@judicial.ky.\n\u2022\nSubject to the directions of the Judge in each case, the use of\nelectronic bundles is especially encouraged at this time to reduce\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 317\n\nthe need for photocopying and circumstances for the transmission\nof COVID-19.\u201d\n\n2.  An important aspect of ensuring that more cases than usual can proceed\nthrough video conference hearings (\u201cVCR\u201d) and\/or on the papers is the\navailability of a mechanism for the electronic filing of cases without\nhaving to physically deliver documents to the Court.\n\nOn 6 April 2020, the Chief Justice issued Practice Direction No. 2 of\n2020: \u2018The Use of Electronic Signatures, Court Seals and Stamps\u2019. This\nmay also be viewed on the Court\u2019s website: www.judicial.ky.\n\n3.  The FSD Judges are available to hear cases remotely notwithstanding\nthe current pandemic using VCR and applications on the papers as the\nnorm rather than the exception. This will, where necessary, extend to\ntrials as well as interlocutory applications. Traditional oral hearings in\nCourt will remain the ideal form of hearing in many cases in which\ninstance it is hoped that the parties will agree adjournments until the\ncase may be orally heard in Court. While the Shelter in Place\nRegulations remain in force, the FSD will give priority to cases of\nurgency. As noted in the Chief Justice\u2019s 28 March 2020 Press Release\nreproduced in part above:\n\n\u201cParties and their attorneys are advised to contact the FSD\nRegistrar and\/or Listing Officer to identify those cases which must\nproceed by way of video-link and to confirm the arrangements with\nthe\ndesignated\nJudges:\nbridget.myers@judicial.ky\nor\nyasmin.ebanks@judicial.ky.\u201d\n\n4.  This Practice Direction seeks to clarify the main ways in which the\nestablished FSD practice is likely to be modified, on a case by case\nbasis, through the expanded use of remote hearings necessitated by the\nimpracticability of conducting Court hearings as a result of the\nCOVID-19 Pandemic.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 318\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nExisting practice on remote hearings\n5.  The Grand Court Rules regulate the circumstances in which hearings\nmay be held outside the jurisdiction (O.32, r.28 applies to interlocutory\nhearings and O.33, r.1 applies to trials). These are supplemented by\npractice directions (see the Schedule below) and the FSD Users\u2019 Guide\n(see section B2.4 which is set out in the Schedule below). These FSD\nprotocols for video-conference hearings (\u201cVCF\u201d), developed for parttime and full time non-resident judges and applications on the papers\n(set out in the Schedule hereto), provide a valuable platform for\nresponding to the present crisis. The key elements of the existing\nregime which require explicit modification are:\n(a)  the requirement that the judge is participating from overseas;\n(b)  the restriction of the VCF regime to interlocutory applications;\n(c)  the requirement that an application for VCF will be made by a\nparty as opposed to being initiated by the Court;\n(d)  the requirement that the parties should be physically present at a\nhearing in the Court.\n\n6.  As far as the applications on the papers regime is concerned, the key\nelements of the existing regime which require explicit modification are:\n(a)  the assumption that an application for a hearing on the papers can\nonly be made by a party as opposed to being proposed by the\nCourt;\n(b)  the assumption that a hearing on the papers will only in exceptional\ncircumstances be ordered absent the consent of both parties.\n\nChanging the existing practice on remote hearings: governing legal\nprinciples\n7.  In considering what potential changes should be made to the existing\nregime, on a case by case basis, the following guiding principles in\nsection 7 of the Bill of Rights (which is substantially based on article 6\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 319\n\nof the European Convention on Human Rights) must always be borne\nin mind:\n(a)  every litigant has the fundamental right to a fair and public hearing\nwithin a reasonable time;\n(b)  the public may be excluded from proceedings where the Court is\nempowered by law to do so, inter alia, (1) where publicity would\nprejudice the interests of justice, and (2) in interlocutory\nproceedings.\n\n8.  The Grand Court Act (as amended and revised) enables the Court to\nregulate its practice through its own rules (section 18(1)), but filling\nany gaps by reference to current English High Court practice. On\nMarch 25, 2020, the Master of the Rolls and the Lord Chancellor issued\nPractice Direction 51Y (PD) in relation to video and audio hearings\nduring the Coronavirus pandemic. The UK Judiciary website\n(www.judiciary.uk\/announcments) describes the main objects of the\nmodified practice in relation to remote hearings as follows:\n\uf0b7 clarify that the court may exercise the power to hold a remote\nhearing in private where it is not possible for the hearing to be\nsimultaneously broadcast in a court building. It may do so\nconsistently with the power to derogate from the principle of\nopen justice and may do so under the provisions of this PD in\naddition to the bases for doing so set out in CPR 39.2. Where\nsuch an order is made under the PD the provisions in CPR\n39.2(5) do not apply;\n\uf0b7 confirm that the court may not conduct a remote hearing in\nprivate where arrangements can be made for a member of the\nmedia to access the remote hearing. It makes clear that in such\ncircumstances the court will be conducting the hearing in\npublic;\n\uf0b7 clarifies that the court may direct that where it conducts a\nremote hearing in private, the court must, where it is\npracticable to do so, order that the hearing is recorded. Where\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 320\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nit has power to do so, it may order the hearing to be video\nrecorded, otherwise where a recording is to be made it should\nbe an audio recording. Available powers to order such hearings\nto be recorded, and subsequently broadcast, apply to the Court\nof Appeal (Civil Division) through The Court of Appeal\n(Recording and Broadcasting) Order 2013 and are expected to\napply more generally through s.85A of the Courts Act 2003,\nwhich is intended to be inserted by the Coronavirus Bill;\n\uf0b7 where a remote hearing is either audio or video recorded, any\nperson may apply to the court for permission to access the\nrecording.\u201d\n\n9.  The English practice confirms that this Court should only have a nonpublic remote hearing where it is constitutionally permissible to have a\nprivate hearing, and that best efforts should be made to provide public\naccess to any remote hearing either while it is taking place or by\nproviding if possible a video recording afterwards.\n\n10.  The overriding objective of the Grand Court Rules is that civil cases\nshould be managed in a way which is designed to achieve, inter alia,\nthe following objectives:\n\u201c(a)  ensuring that the substantive law is rendered effective and that\nit is carried out;\n(b)  ensuring that the normal advancement of the proceeding is\nfacilitated rather than delayed;\n (c)  saving expense\u2026\u201d\n11. GCR O.33, r.1 provides that the trial [regarded as distinct from an\ninterlocutory hearing] of a cause or matter, or any question or issue\narising therein, may take place outside the Cayman Islands where for\nsome special reason the Court so orders and the Secretary of State for\nForeign and Commonwealth Affairs has certified that neither the\nSecretary of State nor the authorities in the country concerned have any\nobjection to the Court\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 321\n\nsitting in such country. The Secretary of State for Foreign and\nCommonwealth Affairs has confirmed that for the duration of the\nCoronavirus emergency the trial of any FSD cause or matter, or any\nquestion or issue arising therein, may take place in the United\nKingdom.\nRemote hearings: the modified approach\n12.  During the Coronavirus pandemic, and for so long as it is not possible\nto safely conduct in person hearings which would ordinarily be open to\nthe public or for non-resident judges (and counsel who have obtained\nlimited admission for the relevant application and matter) to travel to\nthe Cayman Islands, FSD Judges may consider the appropriateness in\nlight of the principles summarised above of:\n(a)  directing VCF hearings whether or not the Judge, the parties or\ncounsel are in the jurisdiction or abroad;\n(b)  directing VCF hearings in respect of final and not just interlocutory\nmatters, provided that appropriate safeguards to ensure public\naccess to the hearing or a record of the hearing can be put in place\n(and where there is video link to the Court assigned to the matter\nthe requirement for providing sufficient public access will usually\nbe treated as having been satisfied);\n(c)  directing that an application which would typically be heard on the\npapers should be heard on that basis without both parties\u2019 consent,\nwhere it appears that substantive justice would be more\nundermined by delay than by directing that an oral hearing should\ntake place.\n13. The existing practice of the FSD in relation to the above matters and\nwhich are set out in the Schedule below shall continue to apply, subject\nto such modifications as may be required for any particular case. Any\nmodifications will be guided by the principles set out above.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 322\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSCHEDULE: Current Practice Directions\n1.  PD No, 1\/2010,1 which relates to hearings by telephone and by video\nlink, provides at para.10:\n\uf0b7 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate\ncases, hear summonses for directions and interlocutory\napplications by means of telephone or video conferences when\nthey are off the Island and, pursuant to para 10.2 and paras 9.4\nand 9.5, where a hearing takes place by way of a telephone\nconference call, the etiquette requires that all participating\nattorneys must be on line before the appointed time, so that the\nJudge will be the last person to join the conference, whereupon\nhe will ask all the participants to identify themselves. Telephone\nhearings may not be tape recorded without the consent of the\nJudge. If the Judge permits or directs that the hearing be tape\nrecorded, he will direct that a written transcript be prepared,\nsent to the Judge and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever\na hearing is not tape recorded, the note taken or approved by\nthe Judge will constitute the official record.\n2.  PD2\/2012 also relates to interlocutory hearings (whether by telephone\nor by video link) by a Judge who is physically overseas (but see para\nB2.4 of the FSD Users Guide below for the usual practice nowadays):\n\n1.  Introduction\n1.1 This practice direction applies to all applications seeking the\nsanction of the Court for the use of video conferencing (VCF),\n1.2 The purpose of this practice direction is to explain and clarify\ncertain procedures and arrangements necessary in this relatively\nnew method of taking evidence in trials or in other parts of any\nlegal proceedings, for example, interim application case\nmanagement conferences and pre-trial reviews. Further guidance\n\n1 Revoked by PD 2 of 2013.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 323\n\nis given in the Video Conferencing Guide appended to this practice\ndirection.\n1.3 VCF equipment may be used both (a) in a Courtroom, whether via\nequipment which is permanently placed there or via a mobile unit,\nand (b) in a separate studio or conference room. In either case, the\nlocation at which the Judge sits is referred to as the \"local site\".\nThe other site or sites to and from which transmission is made are\nreferred to as \"the remote site(s)\u201d and in any particular case any\nsuch site may be another Courtroom.\n\n2.  Preliminary arrangements\n2.1 The Court's permission is required for any part of the proceedings\nto be dealt with by means of VCF. Before seeking a direction, the\napplicant should notify the listing officer or other appropriate\nCourt officer of the intention to seek it, and should enquire as to\nthe availability of Court VCF equipment for the day or days of the\nproposed VCF.\n2.2 The application for a direction should be made to any of the Judges\nof the Grand Court. If all parties consent to a direction, permission\ncan be sought by letter, fax or e-mail, although the Court may still\nrequire an oral hearing. All parties are entitled to be heard on\nwhether or not such a direction should be given and as to its terms.\nIf a witness at a remote site is to give evidence by an interpreter,\nconsideration should be given at this stage as to whether the\ninterpreter should be at the local site or the remote site.\n2.3 If a VCF direction is given, arrangements for the transmission will\nthen need to be made. The Court will ordinarily direct that the\nparty seeking permission to use VCF is to be responsible for this.\nThat party is hereafter - in civil cases -referred to as \u2018the VCF\narranging party\u2019.\n2.4 .The VCF arranging party must contact the listing officer or other\nappropriate officer of the Court and make arrangements for the\nVCF transmission. Details of the remote site, and of the equipment\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 324\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nto be used both at the local site (if not being supplied by the Court)\nand the remote site (including the number of ISDN lines and\nconnection speed), together with all necessary contact names and\ntelephone numbers, will have to be provided to the listing officer\nor other Court officer. The Court will need to be satisfied that any\nequipment provided by the parties for use at the local site and that\nat the remote site is of sufficient quality for a satisfactory\ntransmission.\n\n3. Costs\n3.1  Subject to any order to the contrary, all costs of the transmission,\nincluding the costs of hiring equipment and technical personnel to\noperate it, will initially be the responsibility of, and must be met\nby, the VCF arranging party. All reasonable efforts should be\nmade to keep the transmission to a minimum and so keep the costs\ndown. All such costs will be considered to be part of the costs of\nthe proceedings and the Court will determine at such subsequent\ntime as is convenient or appropriate who, as between the parties,\nshould be responsible for them and (if appropriate) in what\nproportions.\n\n4. Recording\n4.1 The VCF arranging party must arrange for the recording\nequipment to be provided by the Court so that the evidence may be\nrecorded at the local site.\n4.2 Application for a direction from the Court must be made for the\nprovision of recording equipment at the remote site by the\narranging party.\n4.3 No other recording may be made of any proceedings via VCF, save\nas directed by the Court.\n\n3.  Paragraph B 2.4 of the FSD Users Guide provides as follows:\n(a)  Ideally an application for a proposed application to be heard\nby telephone or by video link should be made to the assigned\nJudge before he or she goes overseas so that all the relevant\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 325\n\nconsiderations can be fully ventilated at an oral hearing in\nchambers. However, if that is not feasible in the\ncircumstances, the request for a proposed application to be\nheard by telephone or by video link when the assigned Judge\nis already overseas will in practice usually be addressed in\nthe first instance to the assigned Judge\u2019s PA, who will be in\ndirect contact with the Judge and can most easily and quickly\ntransmit the request direct to the Judge. The request should be\nsupported by a letter from the applicant\u2019s attorney explaining\nin detail why the request is being made, whether the proposed\napplication will be supported or opposed by any other party,\nwhy it is not possible or desirable to await the Judge\u2019s return,\nhow much supporting documentation in the form of evidence,\nauthorities etc. is involved and how long the hearing is likely\nto take. It is entirely a matter for the discretion of the assigned\nJudge whether to hear the application at all while off the\nIsland and, if so, whether by telephone or by video link. All\ncommunications with the Judge must be made through the\nJudge\u2018s PA; no direct communication with the Judge is\npermitted. If the Judge agrees to hear the application by\ntelephone or video link the applicant\u2018s attorney must liaise\nwith the Judge\u2019s PA who will be responsible for all practical\narrangements.\n(b)  In determining whether or not to hear a proposed application\nby telephone or video link the assigned Judge will usually\nconsider whether the proposed application is sufficiently\nurgent and important to justify the time, inconvenience and\ncost of it being heard by telephone or video link. The Judge\nwill also take into account how long the hearing is likely to\ntake and how long it will be before he or she would be able to\nhear the application on Island.\n(c)  The assigned Judge will usually only agree to hear an\napplication by telephone if it is relatively straightforward, not\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 326\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nhighly contested and will not last more than a maximum 2\nhours unless there are special circumstances.\n(d)  An application for a witness to be allowed to give evidence by\nvideo link, whether in a hearing when the Judge is overseas\nor in a hearing or trial when the Judge is not overseas, will\nusually only be granted in very exceptional circumstances.\nUnless the proposed evidence of the witness is purely formal\nand will not involve any significant cross-examination, the\nCourt will be very reluctant to grant such an application.\nAmongst other things, there will be concerns as to the Judge\u2018s\nability to satisfactorily assess the witness\u2018s demeanour,\nobjectivity and reliability over a video link and the ability to\nensure that no one else is present unseen with the witness who\nmay be able to prompt the witness. Such concerns will be\nexacerbated if the witness requires an interpreter. The strong\npreference of the Court is to see and hear the evidence of a\nwitness in person.\n(e) The current video conferencing guide is set out on the next\npage.\n\n4.  The Video Conferencing Guide currently set out in the FSD Users\u2019\nGuide provides as follows:\nVIDEO CONFERENCING GUIDE\nThis guidance is for the use of video conferencing (VCF) in civil\nproceedings. It is in part based upon the protocol of the Federal Court\nof Australia and CPR 32 Practice Direction of the Courts of England\nand Wales. It is intended to provide a guide to all persons involved in\nthe use of VCF, although it does not attempt to cover all the practical\nquestions which might arise.\nVIDEO CONFERENCING GENERALLY\n1.  VCF may be a convenient way of dealing with any part of\nproceedings: it can involve considerable savings in time and cost.\nIts use for the taking of evidence from overseas witnesses will, in\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 327\n\nparticular, be likely to achieve a material saving of costs. It is,\nhowever, inevitably not as ideal as having the witness physically\npresent in Court. Its convenience should not therefore be allowed\nto dictate its use. A judgment must be made in every case in which\nthe use of VCF is being considered not only as to whether it will\nachieve an overall cost saving but as to whether its use will be\nlikely to be beneficial to the efficient, fair and economic disposal\nof the litigation. In particular, it needs to be recognised that the\ndegree of control a Court can exercise over a witness at the remote\nsite is or may be more limited than it can exercise over a witness\nphysically before it.\n2.  When used for the taking of evidence, the objective should be to\nmake the VCF session as close as possible to the usual practice in\na trial Court where evidence is taken in open Court. To gain the\nmaximum benefit, several differences have to be taken into\naccount. Some matters, which are taken for granted when evidence\nis taken in the conventional way, take on a different dimension\nwhen it is taken by VCF: for example, the administration of the\noath, ensuring that the witness understands who is at the local site\nand what their various roles are, the raising of any objections to\nthe evidence and the use of documents.\n3.  It should not be presumed that all foreign governments are willing\nto allow their nationals or others within their jurisdiction to be\nexamined before a Court by means of VCF. If there is any doubt\nabout this, enquiries should be directed to the Foreign and\nCommonwealth Office (International Legal Matters Unit,\nConsular Division) with a view to ensuring that the country from\nwhich the evidence is to be taken raises no objection to it at\ndiplomatic level. The party who is directed to be responsible for\narranging the VCF (see paragraph 8 below) will be required to\nmake all necessary inquiries about this well in advance of the VCF\nand must be able to inform the Court what those inquiries were\nand of their outcome.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 328\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n4. Time zone differences need to be considered when a witness abroad\nis to be examined in the Cayman Islands by VCF. The convenience\nof the witness, the parties, their representatives and the Court must\nall be taken into account. The cost of the use of a commercial\nstudio is usually greater outside normal business hours.\n5. Those involved with VCF need to be aware that, even with the most\nadvanced systems currently available, there are the briefest of\ndelays between the receipt of the picture and that of the\naccompanying sound. If due allowance is not made for this, there\nwill be a tendency to \u2018speak over\u2019 the witness, whose voice will\ncontinue to be heard for a millisecond or so after he or she appears\non the screen to have finished speaking.\n6. With current technology, picture quality is good, but not as good as\na television picture. The quality of the picture is enhanced if those\nappearing on VCF monitors keep their movements to a minimum.\n\nPRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS\n7.  The VCF arranging party must ensure that an appropriate person\nwill be present at the local site to supervise the operation of the\nVCF throughout the transmission in order to deal with any\ntechnical problems.\n8.  It is recommended that the Judge, practitioners and witness should\narrive at their respective VCF sites about 20 minutes prior to the\nscheduled commencement of the transmission.\n9.  If the local site is not a Courtroom, but a conference room or\nstudio, the Judge will need to determine who is to sit where. The\nVCF arranging party must take care to ensure that the number of\nmicrophones is adequate for the speakers and that the panning of\nthe camera for the practitioners' table encompasses all legal\nrepresentatives so that the viewer can see everyone seated there.\n10.  The proceedings, wherever they may take place, form part of a trial\nto which the public is entitled to have access (unless the Court has\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 329\n\ndetermined that they should be heard in private). If the local site\nis to be a studio or conference room, the VCF arranging party must\nensure that it provides sufficient accommodation to enable a\nreasonable number of members of the public to attend.\n11. In cases where the local site is a studio or conference room, the\nVCF arranging party should make arrangements, if practicable,\nfor the Royal Coat of Arms to be placed above the Judge's seat.\n12. In cases in which the VCF is to be used for the taking of evidence,\nthe VCF arranging party must arrange for recording equipment to\nbe provided by the Court which made the VCF direction so that\nthe evidence can be recorded. An associate will normally be\npresent to operate the recording equipment when the local site is\na Courtroom. The VCF arranging party should take steps to\nensure that an associate is present to do likewise when it is a studio\nor conference room. The equipment should be set up and tested\nbefore the VCF transmission. It will often be a valuable safeguard\nfor the VCF arranging party also to arrange for the provision of\nrecording equipment at the remote site. This will provide a useful\nback-up if there is any reduction in sound quality during the\ntransmission. A direction from the Court for the making of such a\nback-up recording must, however, be obtained first. This is\nbecause the proceedings are Court proceedings and, save as\ndirected by the Court, no other recording of them must be made.\nThe Court will direct what is to happen to the back-up recording.\n13. Some countries may require that any oath or affirmation to be taken\nby a witness accord with local custom rather than the usual form\nof oath or affirmation used in the Cayman Islands. The VCF\narranging party must make all appropriate prior inquiries and put\nin place all arrangements necessary to enable the oath or\naffirmation to be taken in accordance with any local custom.\n\nThat party must be in a position to inform the Court what those\ninquiries were, what their outcome was and what arrangements\nhave been made. If the oath or affirmation can be administered in\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 330\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nthe manner normal in the Cayman Islands, the VCF arranging\nparty must arrange in advance to have the appropriate holy book\nat the remote site. The associate will normally deliver the oath.\n14. Consideration will need to be given in advance to the documents to\nwhich the witness is likely to be referred. The parties should\nendeavour to agree on this. It will usually be most convenient for\na bundle of the copy documents to be prepared in advance, which\nthe VCF arranging party should then send to the remote site.\n15. Additional documents are sometimes quite properly introduced\nduring the course of a witness's evidence. To cater for this, the\nVCF arranging party should ensure that equipment is available to\nenable documents to be transmitted between sites during the\ncourse of the VCF transmission, Consideration should be given to\nwhether to use a document camera. If it is decided to use one,\narrangements for its use will need to be established in advance.\nThe panel operator will need to know the number and size of\ndocuments or objects if their images are to be sent by document\ncamera. In many cases, a simpler and sufficient alternative will be\nto ensure that there are fax transmission and reception facilities at\nthe participating sites.\n\nTHE HEARING\n16. The procedure for conducting the transmission will be determined\nby the Judge. The Judge will determine who is to control the\ncameras. In cases where the VCF is being used for an application\nin the course of the proceedings, the Judge will ordinarily not enter\nthe local site until both sites are on line. Similarly, at the\nconclusion of the hearing, he will ordinarily leave the local site\nwhile both sites are still on line. The following paragraphs apply\nprimarily to cases where the VCF is being used for the taking of\nthe evidence of a witness at a remote site. In all cases, the Judge\nwill need to decide whether Court dress is appropriate when using\nVCF facilities. It might be appropriate when transmitting from\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 331\n\nCourtroom to Courtroom. It might not be when a commercial\nfacility is being used.\n17. At the beginning of the transmission, the Judge will probably wish\nto introduce themselves and the advocates to the witness. That\nJudge will probably want to know who is at the remote site and\nwill invite the witness to introduce themselves and anyone else who\nis with that witness. The Judge may wish to give directions as to\nthe seating arrangements at the remote site so that those present\nare visible at the local site during the taking of the evidence. The\nJudge will probably wish to explain to the witness the methods of\ntaking the oath or of affirming, the manner in which the evidence\nwill be taken, and who will be conducting the examination and\ncross-examination. The Judge will probably also wish to inform\nthe witness of the matters referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 above\n(co-ordination of picture with sound, and picture quality).\n18. The examination of the witness at the remote site should follow as\nclosely as possible the practice adopted when a witness is in the\nCourtroom. During examination, cross-examination and reexamination, the witness must be able to see the legal\nrepresentative asking the question, and also any other person\n(whether another legal representative or the Judge) making any\nstatements in regard to the witness's evidence. It will in practice\nbe most convenient if everyone remains seated throughout the\ntransmission.\n\n5.  The FSD Users\u2019 Guide also makes the following provision for\napplications on the papers:\nB1.1 APPLICATIONS \u2015ON THE PAPERS\nB1.1(a)Although contested applications are usually best determined at\nan oral hearing, some applications may, in the discretion of the\nJudge, be suitablefor determination on the papers without the need\nfor an oral hearing.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 332\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nB1.1(b)If the applicant considers that the application may be suitable\nfor determination on the papers, the applicant should ensure\nbefore filing the papers that:\n(i)  the application, together with any supporting evidence, has\nbeen served on the defendant\/respondent (if any);\n(ii) the defendant\/respondent (if any) has been allowed the\nappropriate period of time in which to serve evidence in\nopposition;\n(iii) any\nevidence\nin\nreply\nhas\nbeen\nserved\non\nthe\ndefendant\/respondent (if any); and\n(iv) there is included in the papers the written consent of the\ndefendant\/respondent (if any) to the disposal of the\napplication on the papers without an oral hearing.\nB1.1(c) An application to be disposed of on the papers will not require\na summons. There should however be a supporting letter from the\napplicant\u2018s attorney.\nB1.1(d) Only in the most exceptional cases will the Court dispose of an\napplication on the papers in the absence of the consent of the\ndefendant\/respondent (if any) to the Court doing so. If an\napplication is or is likely to be opposed the Court will usually\nrequire an oral hearing, in which case the applicant should file\nand serve a summons in the usual way\nB1.1(e) The Applicant must submit a draft proposed order with the\npapers. The draft proposed order must expressly state that the\nJudge considers the application to be suitable to be disposed of on\nthe papers without the need for an oral hearing.\nB1.1(f) Any application for an interim injunction or similar remedy will\nnormally require an oral hearing.\nHon Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\n9 April 2020\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 333\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 334\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6A OF\n2020\nFINANCIAL SERVICES DIVISION: PRACTICE DIRECTION\nMODIFYING STANDARD HEARING PRACTICE DURING\nCORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE\n\nIntroductory\n1. This Practice Direction is further to Practice Direction No. 6 of\n2020 'Modifying Standard Remote Hearing Practice During\nCorona virus Pandemic Until Further Notice' issued by the Chief\nJustice on 9 April 2020.\n\n2. Practice Direction No. 6 addressed the increased use of remote\nhearings and how the pre-existing practice will be modified. The\npresent Practice Direction addresses the length of hearings and\nspecial accommodations for counsel and seeks to introduce a\nuniform approach in relation to hearings taking place in the\nCayman Islands and significantly increased number of cases\ninvolving FSD Judges presiding by video-link from London.\n\n3. Notwithstanding the latest changes to the Shelter-in-Place\nRegulations (SL 43 of 2020) which allow parties and their lawyers\nto attend court to fulfil legal obligations, because Government's\nsocial distancing policies are likely to remain in place for the\nimmediate future, remote hearings will continue to take place\nunless there is a compelling reason for a hearing to take place in\nCourt.\nSitting times\n4. A full day hearing will generally last no longer than 4 hours and a\nhalf-day hearing no longer than 2 hours. Subject of course to\nmodification as the interests of justice may require, the standard\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6A OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 335\n\nsitting hours for hearings lasting one or more full days will be as\nfollows (all times are Cayman Islands time):\n\u2022\n8.30am-10.30 am:\u00bd day\n\u2022\n10.30-11.00 am: break\n\u2022\n11.00am-l.00pm: \u00bd day.\n\nSpecial accommodations for counsel\n5. Counsel may be presented with extenuating personal circumstances\narising out of the Coronavirus Pandemic which impact on their\navailability for scheduled hearings. FSD Judges will be sensitive to the\nimportance of confidentiality and will seek to make special\naccommodations for counsel, where the interests of justice will not be\ncompromised, without requiring full particulars to be given of the\nmatters concerned.\n\n5 May 2020\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 336\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020\nSittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of videoconference\n\n (Issued by the Chief Justice pursuant to section 95(7)(d) of the Cayman\nIslands Constitution Order 2009 and section 5 of the Court of Appeal\nLaw, in consultation with and by approval of the President of the Court\nof Appeal).\n\nSittings of the Court of Appeal proceeding by way of video-conference\nin response to the Public Health (Prevention, Control and Suppression\nof COVID-19) (Amendment) Regulations, 2020 [\u201cthe Regulations\u201d].\n\nIn a Press Release by the Chief Justice on 28 March 2020 it was stated\namong other things that: \u201cAs a result of the prevailing travel restrictions, the\nPresident and Justices of Appeal will not be travelling to preside in Court in\nCayman for the upcoming April-May session [Spring Session]. However,\nvideo-conference arrangements are being made to allow the Court to be\nconvened with the President and Justices presiding from the United\nKingdom. The List of appeals to be taken will likely be reduced because of\nthe circumstances. Parties and\/or their attorneys should contact the\nRegistrar of the Court of Appeal for the confirmation of listings at 244-3808\nor by e- mail to: Jenesha.Simpson@judicial.ky.\"\n\nThe List of Appeals having been settled and published on 11 April 2020,\nfollowing are directions for the conduct of the various hearings by way of\nvideo-conference.\n1.\nThe President and Justices of Appeal will appear and preside together\nin Court 6 or Court 1 (as the cases may require) where the Court of\nAppeal will be convened by video-links from the United Kingdom.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 337\n\nExcept for 29 and 30 April when criminal appeals will commence at\n10am, time zone differences will require that proceedings commencing\nat 8am, local time.\n\nThe Registrar and IT Technician will be present in the Courtroom\nwhere they will provide necessary administrative and technical support\nto the Court.\n\nExcept in family matters, the proceedings will be in open court and\ndeemed public proceedings. However, in keeping with the need for\nsocial distancing as mandated by the Regulations, the physical\nattendance of persons will not be allowed.  Instead the proceedings will\nbe streamed live from the Courtroom via the website: www.judicial.ky.\n\nMembers of the public and the Press may hear and view the\nproceedings by connecting to the link displayed on the home page. The\nproceedings will be streamed live and a recording will be available\nthrough the website link for 30 days after the conclusion of the Spring\nSession.\n\nIt may be necessary from time to time for there to be breaks in\ntransmission to prevent the publication of prejudicial evidence or\nstatements but only as the Court may deem strictly necessary.\n\nParticipation in the proceedings will be by password and dial-in access.\nParties and their attorneys must obtain these details from the Registrar\nbeforehand.\n\n2. Criminal Appeals\n\nSubject to the directions of the Court as the case may require,\nAppellants will appear before the Court and participate by way of\nvideo-link. Their attorneys may appear in person or by way of videolink.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION NO 7 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 338\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nThe technology will allow for Appellants and their attorneys to consult\nin private with the leave of the Court by way of \u201cbreak out rooms\u201d.\n\nCounsel for the Crown may appear in person or by way of video-link.\n\n3.\nFamily appeals.\n\nThe family appeal B.J v D.J listed for 4 and 5 May 2020 will proceed\nin camera, pursuant to section 5 of the Court of Appeal Act (as amended\nand revised) and in keeping with the private and sensitive nature of\nsuch matters.\n\nThe parties and their attorneys will appear by way of video-link except\nwith the leave of the Court limited to one party and one attorney on\neach side appearing in person.\n\n4.\nCivil appeals.\n\nThe parties and their attorneys will appear by way of video-link except\nwith the leave of Court limited to one party and one attorney on each\nside appearing in person.\n\n5.\nThe proceedings will be recorded via ZOOM or in such other manner\nas the Court might direct. On the application of any person, any\nrecording so made is to be accessed by application to the Registrar, with\nthe consent of the Court.\n\n13 April 2020.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION 8 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 339\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION 8 OF 2020\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS BY AUDIO OR VIDEO\nLINKS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC\n\nOpen justice is a fundamental principle in our court systems, and will\ncontinue to be so as we increase the use of audio and video technology in\nresponse to the COVID-19 pandemic. In considering the use of telephone\nand video technology, the judiciary will have regard to the principles of\nopen justice, as they do now. As they do now, judges (including the\nmagistrates), may determine that a hearing should be held in private if this\nis necessary to secure the proper administration of justice. In particular,\nrecognising the sensitivities of such cases, the usual practice in family and\nChildren Act (as amended and revised) proceedings will be to not broadcast\nthose proceedings and in Criminal proceedings the broadcast may be\nsuspended to prevent transmission to subsequent witnesses. However, a\nrange of measures will continue to support the principle of open justice:\n\n\u2022\nAccess to open hearings by way of live-streaming if and where a\npublic gallery is available at which the integrity of the proceedings\ncan be safeguarded, or a third party such as a member of the press\nmay join the hearing remotely by password access. For the time\nbeing live-streaming of proceedings, will be done to the Town Hall,\n\"Constitution Hall\", George Town, where members of the public\nmay have access for observation only, subject to social distancing\nprotocols.\n\u2022\nTranscripts of hearings in those courts where they are available,\nnow. Any party or interested person is able to request a transcript.\nJudges may direct that the transcript be made available at public\nexpense where appropriate and public access to transcripts, notes or\nother information relating to court proceedings will, of course, be in\nkeeping with applicable law and court rules.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION 8 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 340\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n\u2022\nWith the permission of the judge, an audio recording of a hearing\ncan be made available to be listened to in a court building.\n\u2022\nWith the permission of the judge, in courts where this is already\ndone, the notes of the hearing can be made available on request.\n\u2022\nPublication of the outcome of Grand Court and Court of Appeal\nhearings, or orders or results will continue to be available, in most\ninstances online.\n\u2022\nAccess to hearings and information will be available to accredited\nmedia, such as the provision of listings and results information in\nMagistrates' Courts on the website at www.Judicial.ky or via email\nif requested.\n\u2022\nWhere parties or the press are allowed to observe a hearing remotely\nthey are reminded that it will be a contempt of court to make\nunauthorised recordings of the proceedings or to use or to allow the\nuse of such recordings to interfere with the administration of justice.\nWhere proceedings are being broadcasted, a note will be included in\nthe course of the streaming at the bottom of the screen to this effect:\n\"This is a formal court proceeding in respect of which the usual rules\nas set out in Practice Direction 1 of 2014 (attached) will apply. No\nphotographs, filming or recordings may be made except with the\napproval of the Court.\n\nRequests from the media and others to observe a hearing remotely should\nbe made to the court in advance to allow for inclusion during the hearing\nset-up.\n\n(Enclosure: Practice Direction 1 of 2014)\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 341\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020\nGUIDANCE FOR THE REMOTE NOTARISATION AND ATTESTATION\nOF DOCUMENTS BY ELECTRONIC MEANS\n\n1. These Practice Directions shall be read in conjunction with the Notaries\nPublic Act (as amended and revised) (\"the Law\") and the Notaries\nPublic (Virtual Conduct of Notarial Acts) Regulations (as amended and\nrevised), (\"the Regulations\") made by Cabinet on 17th April 2020 in\nexercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 of the Law and shall\nalso be read, as circumstances require, in conjunction with the Justices\nof the Peace Regulations, 2015,1 including the Schedule thereto.\n\n2. These Directions are primarily intended to allow notarial and Justices\nof the Peace (\"JP\") attestation services to continue to be provided for\nthe purposes of court proceedings whilst observing the COVID-19\nShelter-in-Place Regulations. However, they will, where necessary,\ncontinue to allow such services to be provided remotely after the lifting\nof the Shelter-in -Place Regulations.\n\n3. Conditions for conduct of notarial acts by use of communication\ntechnology\n\nWhere any act by a notary public allowed by the Law is to be carried\nout virtually by use of communication technology (as defined by the\nRegulations), the following conditions shall apply \u2014\n(a) the remotely located individual seeking notarial services (\"the\nindividual\" ) must demonstrate that that individual is physically\nsituated in the Islands ;\n(b) the individual shall transmit to the notary public via facsimile,\nemail or other electronic means, a legible copy of the relevant\ndocument in relation to which notarial acts are to be performed ;\n\n1 Made under the Summary Jurisdiction Law (2006 Revision).\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 342\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(c) the notary public may, after observing the signature or requisite act\nof the individual, notarise the transmitted copy of the document\nand return it via facsimile, email or other electronic means;\n(d) the notary public shall record the details of the notarial act\nperformed in the Notarial Acts Book in accordance with Section\n13 of the Law and in so doing shall indi cate that the notarial act\nwas performed in accordance with the Regulations;\n(e) where the individual is not personally known to the notary public,\nthe individual shall present valid photo identification to the notary\npublic during the real time transmission interaction.\n\n4.\nRecording of notarial act\n\nA notary public who uses communication technology to \u2014\n(a) administer an oath shall record, or cause to be recorded, the\nperformance of that notarial act;\n(b) perform an act (other than the act of administering an oath)\nrequired to be performed by a notary public under any law\nincluding the provisions of any treaty or convention and any\nprotocol to such treaty or convention that is applicable to the\nIslands may, upon prior notification of the individual, record, or\ncause to be recorded, the performance of the act.\n\n5.\nFiling of notarial certificate with the Court\n(a) Where required for the purposes of filing with the Court, a notarial\ncertificate must disclose that the notarisation was conducted using\ncommunication technology.\n(b) The document so certified may then be filed by the individual by\nemail with the Court and accepted as a duly sworn document for\ncourt related purposes.\n(c) The individual will be required to provide an undertaking to the\nCourt that the original document will be filed once the Court\nreopens to the public.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 9 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 343\n\n6. Justices of the Peace\n\nThe procedures set out above are also to be observed, mutatis\nmutandis, as they relate to att estations by Justices of the Peace.\nAnd, in part icular, Justices of the Peace shall keep a written record\nof any attestation by use of communication technology which is to\nbe filed with the court, in compliance with Regulation 12 of the\nJustices of the Peace Regulations, 2015.\n\n5 May 2020\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 344\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020\n1.\nDRAWING UP AND FILING OF JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS\n2.\nFORM OF ORDERS MADE BY THE COURT APPROVED AS TO\nFORM AND CONTENT OR WITH THE CONSENT OF THE\nPARTIES\n3.\nPROVISION OF ORDERS OF THE COURT BY THE CLERK OF\nCOURT\nPreamble\nThis Practice Direction is to be read in conjunction with Grand Court Rules\nOrder 42, rules 5 and 5A as those rules relate respectively to the provision\nof orders, filed with the Court, by the Clerk of Court; to the drawing up and\nfiling of judgments and orders; and to the form and contents of orders of the\nCourt made with the consent of the parties to a cause or matter.\n\nDrawing up and filing of Judgments and Orders (GCR. 0.42, r. 5 and\nr.5A)\n1.\nGCR Order 42, r. 5 deals with the drawing up and filing of orders. Rule\n5(5) provides that the attorney for the successful party shall draw up\nthe order and circulate it to the attorneys for the other parties who shall\nendorse it ''approved as to form and content\". Paragraphs (6) and (7)\nthen provide what is to be done by the Clerk of the Court upon receipt\nof a draft order depending upon whether it complies with paragraphs\n(6) or (7) or rule 5A. In keeping with these rules the following practice\nshall apply:\n(i) Every judgment or order should be dated with the date upon\nwhich it is made. A judgment or order is made when the judge\npronounces it.\n(ii) The attorney responsible for drawing up a judgment or order\nshould include the date upon which it was made in the draft\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 345\n\nwhich is presented for signature. Unsigned draft orders must\nnot be sealed.\n(iii) The date upon which a judgment or order is filed in the\nRegistry should be the date upon which it is signed. After\nhaving been signed the judgment or order will be sealed with\nthe respective Court seal and the date of filing will be inserted\neither by the judge or a Court Registry official.\n\n2.\nForm and content of orders made by the Court approved as to\nform and content by the parties or with the consent of the parties\n(GCR. 0. 42, r.5(5) or r.5A(3).\nOrders encompassed by these rules should be in the\nfollowing format:\n\nUnder the style of cause:\n\"IN CHAMBERS\/IN OPEN COURT\/RESPECTIVE DIVISION\nDATE OF ORDER\nBEFORE HON. JUSTICE\nORDER   or ORDER BY CONSENT OF THE PARTIES\n(as the case may be)\nUPON hearing counsel for the applicant etc.\nIT IS  HEREBY ORDERED THAT:\nDATED the\nFILED the\n\n    JUDGE OF THE GRAND COURT or    CLERK OF THE COURT (as the\ncase may be)\n        And on a separate page, not forming part of the Order, with signatures as required:\n\u201cApproved as to form and content by the Parties\u201d\nOR\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 10 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 346\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n\u201cBy consent of the parties\u201d\n(as the case may be)\n\n3.\nOrder 42 r.5(8) provides:\n\"The Clerk of the Court shall notify the party who drew up the\njudgment or order when it has been filed and shall provide such party\nwith as many sealed copies as he may require upon payment of the\nprescribed fee.\"\nThe obligation of the Clerk of the Court is to notify the successful party\n(through that successful party\u2019s attorney), who drew up the draft order,\nthat the order has been filed and to provide copies to that attorney.\nThere is no requirement to notify and\/or supply copies to other parties.\nHowever, in light of the Court of Appeal's recent pronouncement in\nH.E.B. Enterprises Limited et al v Bernice Richards (as PR of Estate\nof Anthony Richards Deceased) Judgment delivered 21 September\n2020, this practice should be enhanced and the practice will accordingly\nbe as follows:\nThe Clerk of the Court shall supply copies of sealed orders to the attorneys\nof all parties (or to any party acting in person) rather than just to the party\nwho has submitted the draft order.\n\n4.\nPractice Direction No.2 of 1999 and Practice Direction No. 2 of\n2006 are hereby repealed and replaced.\n\nMade this 29th Day of September 2020.\n\nHon Anthony Smellie\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 347\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\nELECTRONIC FILING (E-FILING) AND E-SERVICE IN THE GRAND\nCOURT OF DOCUMENTS VIA THE JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION EFILING PLATFORM\n\n1.\nAuthority\n1.1. This Practice Direction is made by the Chief Justice pursuant to Order 1, Rule\n12(1) of the Grand Court Rules (as amended and revised) (\"the GCR\").\n2.\nCommencement\n2.1. This Practice Direction will come into effect on 8th January 2021.\n3.\nIntroduction\n3.1. In furtherance of the objectives of GCR Order 63 Rule 3 and Order 5 Rules 1(5)\nand (6) this Practice Direction provides for the filing and service of documents\n(\"e- filing and e-service\") by electronic means. The introduction of an electronic\nmeans of filing and service of documents will improve access to justice by\nincreasing efficiencies, timeliness and reducing costs.\n3.2. This Practice Direction applies to all existing cases as well as new cases\ncommenced on or after January 8, 2021 and can be used to file documents to\ncommence or continue cases that are already before the Court.\n3.3. The filing of documents by electronic means must be done in accordance with\nthis Practice Direction.\n4.\nOperation of Electronic filing system\n4.1. The Judicial Administration has acquired an e-filing platform (\"APEX CURIA\"\nthe \"Platform\"). The Platform may be accessed via an internet Portal on the\nJudicial Website (\"www.judicial.ky\").\n4.2. The Platform enables parties to issue proceedings and file documents online to\nthe Civil (in all Divisions) and Criminal Registries of the Courts at any time\nduring or outside normal Court Office opening hours including weekends,\npublic holidays and during Court breaks.\n5.\nElectronic Submission of Documents\n5.1. In order to file documents using the Platform, a party must \u2014\na.\nAccess the Portal by visiting the Judicial Administration website at\nwww.judicial.ky and clicking on the link to the e-filing Portal;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 348\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nb.\nRegister a new account or log into an existing account in the fields of data\nrequired by the Platform.\na.\nEnter details of a new case or an existing case as required by the fields of\ndata of the Platform;\nb.\nUpload the document(s) associated with that case;\nc.\nPay the appropriate fee online by way of the e-filing Portal; and\nd.\nSubmit the document(s).\n6.\nFormat of Documents\n6.1. A document to be filed by electronic means must be submitted in a format\nsupported by the software of the Platform and so in keeping with the following\ndirections.\n6.2. Documents submitted electronically must not be password protected and must\nbe: \u2014\na.\nPrepared electronically using MS Word or open office or any other Word\nProcessor in .doc, .dox, .txt, .rtf, .pdf formats: and\nb.\nConverted into Portable Document Format (PDF) before uploading.\n6.3. Where the document is not a text document, the document must be scanned\nusing an image resolution of 300 dpi (dots per inch) and saved as a PDF\ndocument.\n6.4. Documents submitted through the e-filing Portal must comply with the\nrequirements specified in the GCR Order 66 and explained in the Explanatory\nMemorandum thereof (as amended and revised) Paragraph 16, sub-paragraph\n16.2 which sets out the following: \u2014\nPaper size:\nletter size of approximately 11 inches\n(28 cm) long by 8.5 inches (21.5 cm)\nwide\nMargins:\n1.5 inches (3.5 cm) at top and bottom\n1.5 inches (3.5 cm) at the left side\n1 inch (2.5 cm) at the right side\n6.5. The aggregate size of a document cannot exceed 100 MB (megabytes) for one\nsubmission.\n6.6. Where the aggregate size of a document exceeds 100 MB (megabytes) that large\ndocument must be separated into multiple smaller documents not exceeding 100\nMB ((megabytes) each. Thereafter, each document must be submitted as one\npart of the whole, e.g., - \"part 1 of 3\", \"part 2 of 3, \"part 3 of 3\" and so on.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 349\n\n6.7. Exhibits must be uploaded and submitted separately from the corresponding\nprincipal document but identified as related to it.\n6.8. Each exhibit must be uploaded and identified separately, e.g., - \"exhibit one\nContract\", \"exhibit two cheque\", \"exhibit three Certificate of title\", and so on.\n7.\nIdentity of Party Filing Documents (GCR O.63 r.5)\n7.1. Every document filed in, or process issued out of the Court Office shall identify\nthe filing party in keeping with the requirements of GCR Order 63, Rule 5 and\nas required by the Platform.\n8.\nElectronic Signatures\n8.1. The Platform supports the use of electronic signatures on documents subscribed\nby the registered filing party. A document which requires signature must be\nsigned when submitted for filing by electronic means and must be an electronic\ncopy of the original signed document. A document which requires attestation\nmust be attested to when submitted for filing by electronic means and must be\nan electronic copy of the original attested document.\n8.2. Where parties file documents using the Platform, all original documents filed\nelectronically must be made available for inspection if required by another party\nto the proceedings and\/or by order of the Court.\n9.\nFiling outside business hours\n9.1. Any document submitted through the Platform for filing outside business hours\n(8:30 am to 5:00 pm Mondays to Fridays) or on a public holiday, Saturday, or\nSunday, or any other period during which the Registry is closed, will be deemed\nfiled as soon as the Registry is next open.\n9.2. Documents will be ascribed times of e-filing and if for any reason the Platform\nbecomes non-operational the time of filing will be regarded as the time ascribed\nwhen the document was filed rather than when the process of filing was\ncompleted.\n10. Fees\n10.1. The prescribed fees set out in the Court Fee Rules  (as amended and revised)\nare payable for all documents filed electronically as they would be for\ndocuments filed non- electronically and at the time of filing, whereupon a\nreceipt from the Clerk of Court will be generated through the online payment\nsystem.\n11. Processing by the Registry\n11.1. The Registry will review all documents submitted for filing for compliance with\nthe Grand Court Rules (\"GCR\") and this Practice Direction.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 350\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\na.\nWhere a document has been submitted using the Platform, an automated\nnotification will be generated which will appear in the message centre of\nthe account registered to the filing party and also sent to that party by\nemail.\nb.\nA document submitted using the Platform that complies with the GCR and\nthis Practice Direction shall be filed.\n\nA document submitted for filing that does not comply with the GCR and\nthis Practice Direction shall not be filed and a notice of the reasons for\nnon- acceptance shall be sent to the message centre of the filing party and\nby email to that party with a notice of the reason(s) for non-acceptance.\nThe document may be amended and resubmitted for filing accordingly.\nc.\nEach filed document shall be stamped, dated and paginated sequentially\nbased on the case number under which the document is filed or based on\nthe case number that is assigned to the document if the document filed\ncommences a new case.\nd.\nAn electronic certificate will be applied to all documents accepted by the\nregistry for filing. The electronic certificate validates the authenticity of\nthe document as being duly filed in the Registry.\ne.\nOnce a document has been duly filed in the Registry, an automated\nnotification will be generated which will appear in the message centre of\nthe account registered to the filing party and will also be sent by email, as\nthe case may be, to the filing party to confirm that the document has been\nfiled and to confirm the date and time of filing.\nf.\nOnce a document has been duly filed in the Registry, copies will be\ngenerated electronically for placement on the Public Registers in keeping\nwith GCR Order 63 Rule 8 unless embargoed by direction issued under\nGCR Order 63 Rule 3(4).\n11.2. Subject to paragraph 9 above, a document to which an electronic certificate has\nbeen applied shall be deemed to be filed on the date and time that the document\nwas submitted to the Platform, provided that where a document has not been\naccepted for filing and is resubmitted through the Platform, the date and time of\nfiling shall be the date and time of resubmission of that document.\n12. Electronic Service of documents\n12.1. Subject to the requirements of the GCR for personal service of documents in the\nfirst instance, it is directed that in addition to the means set out in GCR Order\n65 Rule 5(1) for substituted service, any documents requested by the filing party\nto be served may be served electronically by way of the e-filing and e-service\nsystems of the Platform.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 351\n\n12.2. Electronic service of e-filed documents may be effected through the electronic\nservice address of a party which includes:\na.\nAn electronic mail (email) address.\nb.\nOther given electronic media address (SMS or text message).\n12.3. A party specifically consents to accept electronic service by: \u2014\na.\nserving and filing a notice or written consent on any other party, that the\nparty accepts electronic service. The electronic service address at which\nthe party agrees to accept service must be stated in the notice or written\nconsent;\nb.\nelectronically filing any document or acknowledging service of any\ndocument electronically. The party is deemed to agree to accept service at\nthe electronic service address from which the electronic filing or\nacknowledgment is made, provided that self-represented parties must\naffirmatively consent to electronic service as provided under subparagraph\n(a);\nc.\nincluding an electronic service address in the address for service in the\nprescribed form of originating process filed pursuant to GCR Order 5;\nd.\nregistering an account on the Platform. The email address provided during\nregistration shall be the electronic service address for the registered party.\n12.4. An electronic service address is presumed valid for a party if the party files\nelectronic documents with the Court from that address and has not filed and\nserved notice that the address is no longer valid.\n12.5. A party who has consented to electronic service under 12.3 must promptly notify\nthe Court and other parties electronically of any change in their electronic\nservice address.\n12.6. A party who receives a document that is served electronically and is unable to\nview or download the document must promptly notify the serving party and the\nserving party shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the document can be\nviewed and downloaded.\n12.7. A document served to an electronic service address is considered served on the\ndate and time that it is sent.\n13. Proof of service\n13.1. Electronic confirmation of delivery shall serve as proof of service for all\ndocuments served electronically provided that if any dispute arises as to whether\nservice occurred, it shall be resolved by a Judge.\n13.2. Electronic confirmation of delivery shall include:\na.\nE-mail delivery or read receipt;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 11 OF 2020\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 352\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nb.\nConfirmation that an embedded hyperlink in the message envelope was\naccessed;\nc.\nAcknowledgement of receipt by the recipient party, by the recipient party\u2019s\nAttorney-at- Law; or\nd.\nOther means sufficient to satisfy the Court that the document(s) came to\nthe notice of the recipient party such as an electronic certificate of e-service\ngenerated by the platform.\n14. Electronic Service by or on the Court\n14.1. The Court may electronically serve any notice, order, judgment, or other\ndocument issued by the Court on a party to a case or respondent to the judicial\nprocess by delivering same to the electronic service address given by that party\nor respondent.\n14.2. A party may serve a document which is required to be served on the Court by\nfiling and serving same through the Platform for delivery to the email address\nof the Clerk of Court.\n15. Discontinuation\n15.1. The use of emails for the filing of documents pursuant to Practice Direction 5\nof 2020 is discontinued from the 8th January 2021until further notice.\n\nIssued by the Honourable Chief Justice of the Cayman Islands pursuant to Order 1,\nRule 12(1) of the CR on this 14th day of December 2020.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 353\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021\nCOURT FEES RULES (as amended and revised) (\u201cthe Rules\u201d) -\nGRAND COURT RULES ORDER 62 RULE 3(1)\n\n1.\nWhere, in accordance with Rule 3(10(b) of the Rules, the Grand Court or the Court\nof Appeal authorises a bill to be taxed by a person other than the Clerk of the Court,\nthe taxing officer shall be a person appointed as such from among those listed within\nSchedule 1 to this Practice Direction (as amended from time to time).\n\n2.\nIn determining whether to make that authorisation, the Court will consider whether\nthe taxation can thereby be dealt with more expeditiously and effectively taking\naccount of the amount of the bill and the complexity of the taxation.\n\n3.\nThe Court having made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(1O)(b), the allocation\nto a particular taxing officer will be made by the Clerk of Court who will also taking\ninto account the likely complexity of the taxation and any potential for a conflict of\ninterest between any of the taxing officers and any of the parties involved in\nthetaxation.\n\n4.\nWhere the Court has made a direction in accordance with Rule 3(1O)(b) any of the\nparties to the taxation may, at any time up to 7 days after the lodging of the bill for\ntaxation, make representations to the Clerk of the Court regarding any potential\nconflict of interests with any of the taxing officers listed in Schedule 1.\n\n5.\nThe Clerk of Court will allocate a taxation to a taxing officer within 10 days of the\nlodging of the bill for taxation and will notify the parties of the identity of the taxing\nofficer and the fees that are payable under paragraph 5(2)(a) of Part C of the First\nSchedule to the Rules. No taxation will commence until the fees payable under\nparagraph 5(2)(a) have been received.\n\n6.\nWhere fees are payable in accordance with paragraph 5(2)(b) of Part C of the First\nSchedule, the parties will be notified by the Clerk of Court of the amount of fees\npayable within 7 days of the receipt by the Clerk of Court of the taxed bill. The\ncertificate will not be issued until these fees are paid.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 354\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n7.\nWhere appropriate in a particular case, the Clerk of Court may delegate the functions\ndescribed under paragraphs 3- 6 hereof to a Deputy Clerk of Court or to the Registrar\nof the Court of Appeal.\n\nDated this 2nd day of May\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2021\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 355\n\n(Schedule 1)\n\nTAXING OFFICERS APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n(Grand Court Rules, Order 62 r. 3(1))\n\nEffective 1st January 2021\n\nMs Cherry Bridges\nAttorney-at-Law\nMr William Helfrecht\nAttorney-at-Law\nMr Delroy Murray\nAttorney-at-Law\nMr Derek Jones\nAttorney-at-Law\nMr Robert Jones\nAttorney-at-Law\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 356\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021\nEXHIBITS IN CRIMINAL CASES\n\n1.\nThis Practice Direction relates to orders and safe custody of Exhibits and Relevant\nInvestigative Material and shall be read and construed in keeping with the Exhibits\nRules.\n\n2.\nFollowing the commencement of proceedings for an offence, the Court shall consider\nat the first case management hearing (or on arraignment in the Summary Court if the\ncase is to be then disposed of) what orders should be made in relation to the\ninspection, retention, transfer, return, destruction or other disposal of items intended\nto be produced in evidence (in whole or in part) at trial or to be represented by\nExhibits in another form (\u201cRelevant Investigative Material\u201d), including orders for the\nform in which they are to be exhibited. All parties will be expected to have clear\ninstructions in this regard prior to that hearing, particularly in cases involving\nperishable items, dangerous items, controlled drugs (in keeping with section 8 of the\nMisuse of Drugs Act (as amended and revised), items of high monetary\/personal\nvalue, or items requiring large amounts of storage space.\n\n3.\nBefore any item is marked as an Exhibit at trial, careful consideration should be given\nto whether this is necessary or whether it may be possible to adduce the evidence in\nanother manner (e.g. by producing it for temporary inspection by the tribunal of fact,\nor by the use of other evidence of it whether by schedule, photograph, other media or\notherwise).\n\n4.\nWhere the Court considers it appropriate to do so, e.g. on grounds of health, safety,\nsecurity, convenience, or by the agreement of the parties, it may order that an Exhibit\nthat is no longer required in Court is transferred to the safe custody of the relevant\nLaw Enforcement Agency (or otherwise) on such terms as shall be expedient.\n\n5.\nThe Court retains a discretion to make case-specific orders at or before the conclusion\nof trial relating to the retention, transfer, return, destruction or other disposal of\nindividual Exhibits and Relevant Investigative Material, including specifying the\nform in which they may be retained and, exceptionally, orders varying the minimum\nretention periods as set out in the Exhibits Rules.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2021\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 357\n\n6.\nParties have a duty to consider what further or other orders in respect of exhibits and\nRelevant Investigative Material are required or appropriate at the conclusion of trial.\nThey should endeavour to agree any such orders and, if they cannot, identify in an\nagreed note all issues of contention for determination at the conclusion of trial.\n\n7.\nThe Court may, in the interests of justice and in an appropriate case, hear\nrepresentations from interested third parties as to the disposal of individual Exhibits\nor Relevant Investigative Material.\n\n8.\nParties have a duty to ensure that any Exhibit that has been opened or unsealed in\nCourt for inspection or otherwise is resealed at the first appropriate time and during\nany adjournment.\n\n9.\nThe Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions shall forthwith notify in writing the\nrelevant Law Enforcement Agency of any order relating to Exhibits or Relevant\nInvestigative Material and provide to it a copy of the same.\n\n10. On notification by His Majesty\u2019s Cayman Islands Prison Service of the release or\ndischarge of a person to whom Rule [.7] of the Exhibits Rules applies, the Office of\nthe Director of Public Prosecutions shall forthwith notify in writing the relevant Law\nEnforcement Agency of the same.\n\nHon Anthony Smellie QC\nChief Justice\nThe Cayman Islands\n\n29 November 2021\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 358\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nLISTING AND CUSTODY TIME LIMITS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS\nJudicial Listing Officers\u2019 responsibility and key principles\n\nMuch of this Direction is based upon the English Criminal Practice Direction 2015 and it\nmust be read in conjunction with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 and Practice Direction\nNo. 5 of 2015 (Criminal Case Management in the Summary Court).\n\nListing as a judicial responsibility and function\nA1.  Listing is both a judicial and administrative function. The purpose is to ensure that all\ncases are brought to a hearing or trial in accordance with the interests of justice, that\nthe resources available for criminal justice are deployed as effectively as possible,\nand that cases are heard by an appropriate judicial officer or bench with the minimum\nof delay.\n(a)\nThe Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate, in consultation with the Listing\nOfficer and Case Progression Offices respectively of the Grand and the\nSummary Court (CPO) shall have the overall responsibility for approving the\nweekly list of all Grand Court and Summary Court matters, respectively. The\nChief Justice will assign day to day responsibility to the Head of the Grand Court\nCriminal Divisions for the listing of criminal cases.\n(b) The Listing Officer and the CPO respectively of the Grand Court and Summary\nCourts is responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operation of listing practice\nunder the direction of the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate. The Listing\nOfficer\/CPO has one of the most important functions at the Courts and makes a\nvital contribution to the efficient running of Court and to the efficient operation\nof the administration of criminal justice;\n(c)\nIn the Grand Court, the CPO, subject to the daily supervision of the Judge\nresponsible for the Criminal Division, is responsible for liaising with the Listing\nOfficer to settle the list of Grand Court criminal hearings and trials. To this end\nthe CPO and the Listing Officer shall meet every week on Thursday to settle the\nList of criminal cases for the ensuing week.\n(d) In the Summary Courts, the CPO, subject to the supervision of the Chief\nMagistrate, is responsible for administering the listing practice. The day-to-day\nsetting of that listing practice is the responsibility of the Chief Magistrate in\nconsultation with the Magistrates and with the assistance of the CPO.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 359\n\nKey principles of listing\nA2. When approving the lists, the Chief Justice [or the assigned Judge] and Chief\nMagistrate respectively will take into account the following principles:\n(a)\nEnsure the timely trial of cases and resolution of other issues (such as\nconfiscation) so 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\nthe Court as is consistent with the interests of justice, the needs of victims\nand witnesses, and with the proper and timely preparation by the\nprosecution and defence of their cases in accordance with the directions\nand timetable set;\nii.\nPriority should be accorded to the trial of young defendants, and cases\nwhere there are vulnerable or young witnesses. In R v Barker [2010]\nWWCA Crim 4, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales highlighted\n\u201cthe importance to the trial and investigative process of keeping any delay\nin a case involving a child complainant 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) Ensure that in the Summary Courts, unless impracticable, non-custody\nanticipated guilty plea cases are listed no longer than 14 days after a charge is\nfiled with the Court, and non-custody anticipated not guilty pleas are listed no\nlonger than 28 days after a charge is filed [See also in this regard, the provisions\nof paragraph 13.4 \u2013 13.6 of Practice Direction No. 5 of 2015];\n(c)\nProvide, when possible, for certainty and\/or as much advance notice as possible,\nof the trial date; and take all reasonable steps to ensure that the trial date remains\nfixed:\n(d) Ensure that a Judge or Magistrate (with any necessary authorisation 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\nhearings.\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\nSummary Courts;\nii.\nThe proper use of the courtrooms available at the courts and in this regard\nschedules for allocation of courtrooms will be prepared in consultation\nwith the Court Administrator and published along with the Lists on the\nweekly basis;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 360\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\niii.\nThe provision in long and\/or complex cases for adequate reading and\njudgment writing time for the judiciary; [See in this regard Practice\nDirection No.1 of 2012]\niv.\nThe facilities in the available courtrooms including the security needs\n(such as secure dock), size and equipment, such as video and live link\nfacilities;\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\npossible after the remand is made or sentence is passed, and to facilitate\nthe efficient operation 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\nin any delay to the trial of the case.\n(g) Meet the need, in consultation with the Head of Security (and where appropriate\nthe RCIPS and Prison Services), for special security measures for high-risk\ndefendants;\n(h) Ensure that proper time (including judicial reading time) is afforded to hearings\nin which the court is exercising powers that impact on the rights of individuals,\nsuch as applications for investigative orders, bail hearings or warrants\u2019\n(i)\nConsider the significance of ancillary proceedings, such as confiscation\nhearings, and the need to deal with such hearings promptly and, where possible,\nfor such hearings to be conducted by the trial judge.\nA3  Although the listing practice for each Court will take these principles into account the\nlisting practice adopted may vary depending particularly on the number of courtrooms\nand the facilities available, the workload, its volume and type.\n\nDischarge of judicial responsibilities\nA4. The Presiding Judicial Officer of each court is responsible for \u2014\ni.\nensuring that good practice is implemented throughout the Court, such that all\nhearings commence on time;\nii.\nensuring that the cause of trials that do not proceed on the date originally fixed\nare examined to see if there is any systematic issue;\niii.\nmonitoring the general performance of the Court and the listing practices;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 361\n\niv.\nmonitoring the timeliness of cases and reporting any cases of serious concern to\nthe Chief Justice or Chief Magistrate (as the case might be).\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\nB1.  Under the regime set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules, the parties will be expected\nto provide an accurate estimate of the length of trial at the hearing where the case is\nto be managed (CMH 1) based on a detailed estimate of the time to be taken with\neach witness to be called, and accurate information about the availability of witnesses.\nB2.  At the hearing the Court will ask the prosecution to clarify any custody time limit\n(\u201cCTL\u201d) dates which may be applicable. Once the CTL is clarified and approved by\nthe Court, the Court must direct the court clerk to ensure the CTL date is marked\nclearly on the court file or electronic file. When a case is subject to a CTL all efforts\nmust be made at the first hearing to list the case within the CTL and the Judge or\nMagistrate should seek to ensure this. Further guidance on listing CTL cases can be\nfound below.\n\nCases that should usually have fixed trial dates\nB3. The cases where fixtures should be given should usually include the following:\ni.\nCases involving persons in custody;\nii.\nCases involving serious indictable offences;\niii.\nCases involving protected, vulnerable and intimidated witnesses\n(including domestic violence cases), whether or not special measures have\nbeen 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\ndepend on the availability of judicial officers, counsel (defence and\nprosecution) and courtrooms;\nvi.\nCases where a previous hearing has not been effective;\nvii. Re-trials; and\nviii. Cases involving expert witnesses.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 362\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nCustody Time Limits\nB4.  Unlike in England and Wales1,1 in the Cayman Islands there are no specific custody\n\ntime limits imposed by statute other than those which control police powers to keep\npersons in custody pending investigations under section 65 of the Police Act.\n\nTo help to address this deficit, by Rule 9 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019 (CPR)\ntime- frames for the taking of arraignments and the fixing of trial dates are imposed.\nAlso, by paragraph 11 of Practice Direction 5 of 2015 timeframes for conclusion of\ncriminal proceedings in the Summary Courts are identified.\n\nThe Directions which follow below are intended to reaffirm and clarify the\nresponsibility of the Courts and the parties to ensure that cases are disposed of as soon\nas reasonably practicable and in so doing to ensure also that custody time limits\n(CTLs) are strictly observed.\n\nIt must be emphasised that in keeping with section 7(1) of the Constitutional Bill of\nRights, everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of that\nperson\u2019s legal rights and obligations by an independent and impartial court within a\nreasonable time. This right becomes even more compelling when a person is in\ncustody awaiting trial.\n\nAccordingly the following timeframes and CTLs should be observed and paragraph\n11 of Practice 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\nCourt should aim to be concluded, save only in exceptional circumstances,\nwithin 3 months 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\nin exceptional circumstances, within 6 weeks from the date of first appearance\nin the 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\narraignment.\n\n1 Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 enables the Secretary of State by regulations to set time limits in relation\nto preliminary stages of criminal proceeding. This is done by way of the Prosecution of Offences Custody Time Limit\nRegulations 1987 which set time limits for cases to be brought to arraignment.\n2 Pursuant to section 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2019 Revision)\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 363\n\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\nto fitness to plead or the Court is satisfied that the case is complex or involved.\n\nIn furtherance of the foregoing, at the first hearing, the prosecution will inform the\ncourt of any applicable CTL when the CTL lapses and the CTL will be endorsed on\nthe 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\nweeks before 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\nODPP), HMPS and the presiding judicial officer.\niv.\nIf the CTL is at risk of being exceeded, an additional hearing should take place\nand should be listed before the trial judge or other judge nominated by the Chief\nJustice or Chief Magistrate (as the case may be).\nv.\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is an issue, the court must itself list the\ncase to consider the extension of any CTL.\nvi.\nWhere courtroom or judge availability is not in issue, but all parties and the\ncourt agree that the case will not be ready for trial before the expiration of the\nCTL, a date may be fixed outside the CTL. This may be done without prejudice\nto any application to extend the CTLs or with the express consent of the defence;\nand this must be noted on the case file.\nB5. As legal argument may delay the swearing in of a jury, it is desirable to extend the\nCTL to a date later than the first day of the trial.\n\nRe-trials ordered by the Court of Appeal and Grand Court\nB6. The Court must comply with the directions of the Court of Appeal and cannot vary\ndirections for retrials without reference to the Court of Appeal.\nB7. In cases where a re-trial is ordered by the Court of Appeal without a time-frame being\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\ncases where a re-trial is ordered of a charge before the Summary Court, whether by\nthe Court of Appeal or the Grand Court, the CTL will be 56 days from the date that\nthe new charge is preferred i.e. from the date that the charge is delivered to the\nSummary Court. The Courts shall notify the HMPS of this.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 364\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nChanges to the date of fixed cases\nB8. Once a trial date or window is fixed, it should not be vacated or moved without good\nreason. Under the Criminal Procedure Rules, parties are expected to be ready by the\ntrial date.\nB9.  The 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\nprosecution both consent, provided the timely hearing of the case is not delayed. The\nprosecution will be expected to have consulted the witnesses before agreeing to any\nchange. For indictments changes to trial dates should only be made on approval of\nHead of Grand Court Criminal Division or the Judge who has conduct of the case.\nThe Listing Officer or CPO may in circumstances determined by the Head of the\nGrand Court Criminal Division, agree to changes of other listings. For example,\nchanges in dates for sentencing where SIRs and VIRs are not ready.\nB10. In all other circumstances, requests to adjourn or vacate fixtures or trial windows must\nbe referred to the Assigned Judge or Magistrate for that person\u2019s personal attention.\n\nListing of hearings other than trials\nC.1. In addition to trials, the court\u2019s listing practice will have to provide court time for\nshorter matters, such as those listed below at C3. These hearings are important, often\neither for setting the necessary case management framework for the proper and\nefficient preparation of cases for trial, or for determining matters that affect the rights\nof individuals. They must be afforded the appropriate level of resource that they\nrequire to be considered properly, and this may include judicial reading and judgment\nwriting time, as well as an appropriate length of hearing.\nC.2. The applicant is responsible for notifying the court, and the other party if appropriate,\nand ensuring that the papers are served in good time, including a time estimate for\njudicial reading time and for the hearing. The applicant must endeavor to complete\nthe application within the time estimate provided unless there are exceptional\ncircumstances.\nC.3. Hearings other than trials include the following:\ni.\nApplications for search warrants and Production Orders, sufficient reading time\nmust be 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 pretrial case management hearings;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 365\n\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\nare likely 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. Short hearings should not generally be listed before a judge such that they may delay\nthe start or continuation of a trial at the Grand Court. It is envisaged that any such\nshort hearing will be completed by 10:30am or start after 4:30pm.\nC.5. Each Court equipped with a video link with the prisons or RCIPS Detention Center\nmust have in place arrangements for the conduct of remand hearings, pre-trial\nhearings and sentencing hearings.\n\nNotifying sureties of hearing dates\nC.6. Where a surety has entered into a recognisance in the Summary Court in respect of a\ncase allocated or sent to the Grand Court and where the bail order or recognisance\nrefers to attendance at the first hearing in the Grand Court, the defendant should be\nreminded by the presiding Magistrate (or by the CPO or Court Clerk acting upon the\ndirection of the presiding Magistrate) that the surety should attend the first hearing in\nthe Grand Court in order to provide further recognisance if ordered by the Grand\nCourt. If attendance is not arranged, the defendant may be remanded in custody\npending the recognisance being provided.\nC.7. The Court should also notify sureties of the dates of the hearing at the Grand Court at\nwhich the defendant is ordered to appear as far in advance as possible: see the\nobservations of Parker LJ in R v Crown Court at Reading ex p. Bello [1992] 3 All ER\n353. See also the Criminal Procedure Rules, rule 8 by which the Grand Court may\nimpose new bail conditions and require new bail forms to be completed.\n\nApplication for Production Orders and Search Warrants\nC.8. The use of production orders and search warrants involves the use of intrusive state\npowers that affect the rights and liberties of individuals. It is the responsibility of the\ncourt to ensure that those powers are not abused. To do so, the court must be presented\nwith a properly completed application, on the appropriate form, which includes a\nsummary of the investigation to provide the context for the order, a clear explanation\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 1 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 366\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nof how the statutory requirements are fulfilled, and full and frank disclosure of\nanything that might undermine the basis of the application. Further directions on the\nproper making and consideration of such applications will be provided by Practice\nDirection. However, the complexity of the application must be taken into account in\nlisting it such that the judge is afforded appropriate reading time and the hearing is\ngiven sufficient time for the issues to be considered thoroughly, and a short judgment\ngiven.\n\nConfiscation and Related Hearings\nC.9. By virtue of section 44 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (as amended and revised)\n(POCA), applications for restraint orders should be determined by a Judge of the\nGrand Court.\nC.10.In order to prevent possible dissipation of assets of significant value, applications\nunder the POCA should be considered urgent when lists are being fixed. In order to\nprevent potential prejudice, applications for the variation and discharge of orders, for\nthe appointment of receivers, and applications to punish alleged breaches of orders as\na contempt of court should similarly be treated as urgent and listed expeditiously.\n\nConfiscation Hearings\nC.11.It is important that confiscation hearings take place in good time after the defendant\nis convicted or sentenced.\n\nPublication of Lists\nThe Listing Officer or CPO of the Grand Court and Summary Court, will, in consultation\nwith the Chief Justice and Chief Magistrate respectively continue to publish weekly lists\nof hearings in those Courts. Lists will show the courtrooms which are respectively allocated\nto each Court on the weekly basis. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal will continue to\npublish lists in advance for each session in consultation with the President of the Court of\nAppeal\n\nEffective Date\nThis Practice Direction shall come into effect on 14th April 2022\nDated this 7th day of April 2022\n\nHon. Anthony Smellie, Q.C.\nChief Justice\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 367\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\nPROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND\nMANAGEMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PROCEEDINGS\nFinancial Services Division\n\n1.\nAppointment of Registrar of the FSD\n1.1 With effect from February 2016, Mrs. Shiona Allenger, the Clerk of the Court\nwas also designated as the Registrar of the FSD (appointed pursuant to Rule\n2(1) of the Grand Court (Amendment) Rules 2009) and became directly\nresponsible for administrative case management as the focal contact person for\nattorneys and other persons doing business with the FSD.\n\nWith effect from 30 October 2020 Mrs Bridget Clare (nee Myers) was appointed\nActing Registrar of the FSD. The FSD Registry will continue to fall under the\nsupervision of the Clerk of Courts and Mrs Clare with Mrs Clare being the first\nperson to contact.\n1.2 All communications with the FSD Registry should be-\n(a)\nby hand delivery at the FSD Registry, 3rd Floor, Kirk House; or\n(b) by\ne-mail\naddressed\nto\nbridget.clare@judicial.ky\nand\/or\nshiona.allenger@judicial.ky\n(c)\nby telephone 244 3808.\n1.3 References hereinafter to the Registrar will include the Acting Registrar and\nvice versa as circumstances may require.\n2.\nAssignment of proceedings to a Judge of the FSD\n2.1 It is the responsibility of the Registrar, acting on the directions of the Chief\nJustice, to assign every financial services proceeding, as defined in GCR O.72,\nr.1(2) to a named judge of the FSD at the time the proceeding is commenced.\n2.2 It is the responsibility of the petitioner's or plaintiff's attorney to provide the\nRegistrar with any and all information which appears to be relevant in\ndetermining which judge should be assigned to the matter. For example-\n(a)\nIf the plaintiffs attorney considers that it would be appropriate for two or\nmore related matters to be assigned to the same judge, this fact should be\ndrawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with the\noriginating process: or\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 368\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(b) If the plaintiff's attorney considers that it would be inappropriate for a\nmatter to be assigned to a particular judge, for whatever reason, this fact\nshould be drawn to the attention of the Registrar in a letter delivered with\nthe originating process.\n2.3 As soon as a judge has been assigned, the Registrar will -\n(a)\nnotify the parties' attorneys; and\n(b) deliver the Court file to the assigned judge.\n2.4 Attorneys can expect to be notified about the name of the assigned judge on the\nnext business day following the day on which the originating process is filed at\nthe FSD Registry.\n2.5 The Registrar will ensure that the docket of the financial services proceedings\nassigned to each Judge of the FSD is kept up to date and circulated weekly to\nthe Chief Justice.\n2.6 Attorneys are reminded that GCR O.72, r. 2(6) requires that the initials of the\nassigned judge be included in the title of the proceeding as part of the cause\nnumber. It follows that the assigned judge's initials must be included as part of\nthe cause number as it appears in all pleadings, affidavits and orders.\n3.\nProcedure for listing hearings\n3.1 Mrs Yasmin Ebanks will continue to serve as Listing Officer for the Grand\nCourt including the FSD and will continue to make Listings in consultation with\nthe Acting Registrar of the FSD.\n3.2 Listing for FSD cases will be primarily managed by the Acting FSD Registrar\nin liaison with the Listing Officer. All requests for FSD listings must be made\nby\nemail\naddressed\nto\nBridget.Clare@judicial.ky\nor\nto\nShiona.Allenger@judicial.ky, copied to Yasmin.Ebanks@judicial.ky.\n3.3 For the purposes of this Practice Direction the expression \"hearing\" shall\ncontinue to include summonses for directions, case management conferences\n(\"CMCs\") (which may take the form of video or telephone conference calls),\ninterlocutory applications and trials.\n3.4 No matter can be listed for hearing unless and until the proceeding has been\nassigned to a judge of the FSD who has had an opportunity to review the Court\nfile.\n3.5 All applications whether made by summons or by letter (where the application\nis for a matter to be taken on the papers in keeping with FSD Users Guide\nSection Bl) must be filed with the FSD Registry and the appropriate fees paid\nbefore presentation to the judge.\n3.6 Practice Direction #1\/2000 (Listing Forms) does not apply to the FSD.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 369\n\n3.7 Notwithstanding that a primary objective of the FSD is to ensure the availability\nof judges, the Registry of the FSD and Listing Officer are not authorised to fix\nany hearing date without the prior approval of the assigned judge. If the assigned\njudge is not already familiar with the issues or cannot readily ascertain the issues\nrelevant to the proposed hearing by reviewing the Court file, the parties may be\nrequired to produce an agreed case memorandum in accordance with GCR O.72,\nr.4(3).\n3.8 In the case of trials or other potentially lengthy hearings, the assigned judge in\nconsultation with the Acting Registrar and Listing Officer, will normally fix the\nhearing date at the hearing of a summons for directions or at a CMC in which\nall parties' attorneys (and their leading counsel) will be requiredto participate.\n3.9 The Acting Registrar in conjunction with the Listing Officer will publish a\nmonthly list (on the 1st of each month) of hearings scheduled in the FSD for the\nensuing month.\n4.\nListing procedure in respect of Capital Reductions\n4.1 When presenting a petition for an order confirming a resolution for reducing the\nshare capital of a company (under s.15 of the Companies Act) the petitioner's\nattorney is required (pursuant to GCR O.102, r.6) to issue a summons for\ndirections at the same time as presenting the petition.\n4.2 The petitioner's attorney must provide the Registrar with a draft of the proposed\norder for directions including the timetable for the company meeting(s) and\ncourt hearing(s), together with a covering letter which explains whether and, if\nso, why the matter is particularly time sensitive.\n4.3 If upon reading the petition, affidavit and written submissions, the assigned\nJudge is satisfied that settling a list of creditors should be dispensed with under\ns.15(3) or that the reduction is not an exceptional case where settlement of a list\nof creditors is required under s.15(2), and the materials filed do not disclose any\nother reason for the assigned Judge to require additional evidence or\nsubmissions, then that Judge may make an order for directions without the need\nfor a hearing. In all other cases that Judge will direct the Registrar to fix a hearing\nin chambers.\n5.\nListing procedure in respect of petitions for supervision orders under s.124\n5.1 Attorneys should anticipate that supervision orders pursuant to s.124 of the\nCompanies Act (as amended and revised) will normally be made without the\nneed for any hearing (pursuant to CWR O.15, r.5(1).)\n5.2 In the event that the petition gives rise to any issue in respect of which further\nevidence or submissions are required, the assigned judge may convene a CMC\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 370\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nor (in consultation with the Registrar) direct the Listing Officer to fix a date for\nhearing the petition in open court.\n6.\nApplications for an order that a company be restored to the Register\n6.1 Applications made by a company or one of its members, which are governed by\nGCR O.102, r.17, are determined by the Registrar of the FSD and Form Nos. 66\nand 67 should be amended accordingly.\n6.2 If the Registrar decides, pursuant to GCR O.102, r.17 (6) (c), that an application\nought to be referred to a judge for an oral hearing, the Registrar will -\n(a)\nassign the application to a judge of the FSD;\n(b) fix a hearing date; and\n(c)\ngive notice of the hearing to the applicant by e-mail.\n6.3 Applications made by creditors, which are governed by GCR O.102, r.18, will\ncontinue to be heard in open court by a judge of the FSD.\n6.4 At the same time as referring a creditor's application to a judge of the FSD, the\nRegistrar will fix a hearing date. To enable the petitioner to advertise the petition\nand give other creditors an opportunity to be heard, the hearing will be fixed on\na date not less than 21 days nor more than 28 days after the date on which the\npetition is presented.\n7.\nApplications for a direction that payment of court fees be deferred\n7.1 An application by an official liquidator or other officeholder (hereinafter\n\"officeholder) for a direction, pursuant to Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules (as\namended and revised), that payment of court fees be deferred, must be made to\nthe assigned judge.\n7.2 Such applications should be made by letter signed by the officeholder\npersonally, addressed to the assigned judge and sent to the Registrar.\n7.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and that person\u2019s\ndecision will be communicated to the applicant and the Registrar by the judge's\npersonal assistant.\n7.4 In the event that the application is refused, the officeholder shall have the right\nto ask the Judge to reconsider that Judge\u2019s decision, for which purpose the\napplicant may ask the judge's personal assistant to fix an appointment for the\nofficeholder to appear before the Judge in person.\n7.5 The purpose of Rule 6(4) of the Court Fees Rules is to ensure that an\nofficeholder who is required or entitled to make an application to the Court in\nthe performance of a legal duty in circumstances where the court fees will be\npayable out of a fund under that officeholder\u2019s control, should not be deterred\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 371\n\nfrom performing that officeholder\u2019s duty by being put in the position of having\nto pay the court fees out of that officeholder\u2019s own pocket.\n7.6 For the purposes of determining whether an officeholder has under that\nofficeholder\u2019s control \"sufficient money with which to pay the fees\nimmediately\" within the meaning of Rule 6(4), the judge will have regard to the\ngeneral rules as to priority contained in CWR Order 20, the effect of which is\nthat court fees rank ahead of an officeholder's remuneration.\n7.7 If the officeholder does have some cash or cash equivalent assets under that\nofficeholder\u2019s control, the officeholder\u2019s application letter must state (a) the\namount which is immediately available; (b) the amount which is likely to\nbecome available to that officeholder within the next 90 days; (c) the purposes\nfor which the officeholder intends to spend such cash over the next 90 days; and\n(d) whether the officeholder has received any remuneration or holds funds in\ntrust for that purpose.\n7.8 As court fees must be paid in priority to other claims including a liquidator's\nremuneration, an officeholder will be obliged to ensure the payment of court\nfees in keeping with that priority. Court fees deferred are a debt owed to the\nGovernment and will be enforceable as such\n8.\nApplications for a direction that multiple proceedings be treated as \"consolidated\" for\nthe purposes of assessing court fees\n8.1 An application by a petitioner\/plaintiff pursuant to Rule 6(5) of the Court Fees\nRules (as amended and revised) for a direction that two or more separate\nproceedings governed by the Companies Act and the Companies Winding Up\nRules or GCR O.102 be treated as consolidated into one for the purposes of\ncalculating the amount of fixed fees and\/or court hearing fees payable pursuant\nto Rules 3 and\/or 5 of the Court Fees Rules (as amended and revised) must be\nmade to the Registrar.\n8.2 Such applications shall be made by letter addressed to the Registrar at the time\nof filing the originating process.\n8.3 The application will be determined by the assigned judge and the provisions of\nparagraphs 7.3 and 7.4 above shallapply.\n8.4 In deciding upon an application under Rule 6(5) the assigned judge will have\nregard to the fact that the filing of each proceeding will have engaged the time\nand effort of the Registrar and support staff and whether instead of ordering that\nonly one set of fees shall be payable, the additional fees paid or some reasonable\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 372\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nproportion of them, shall be applied to cover fees which will be due for the\nhearing of the consolidated proceeding going forward.1\n9.\nCase Management Conferences\n9.1 Without prejudice to the requirements of 0.72, r.4 (2), the assigned Judge may\nconvene a CMC whenever that Judge thinks fit.\n9.2 A CMC may take the form of a telephone conference call, especially if foreign\nlawyers and leading counsel have been retained by any of the parties or the\nassigned judge is likely to be off the Island.\n9.3 When a CMC takes the form of a video conference or telephone call, the\nRegistrar will direct the IT Department to set up the call and circulate the log-in\ninstructions to the Judge and all the parties. Where the CMC takes the form of\na telephone call, the Registrar will direct one of the parties (usually the\napplicant) to set up the call and circulate the dial in instructions and codes to the\nJudge and all the parties.\n9.4 The etiquette for video conference (or telephone) CMCs requires that all\nparticipating attorneys (apart from leading counsel or foreign lawyers who may\nparticipate remotely) must be present in the court room or Judge's chambers and\nbe on line before the appointed time, so that the Judge will be the last person to\njoin the conference, whereupon the Judge will ask all the participants to identify\nthemselves.\n\nWhere the CMC will not be determinative of substantive issues, the Judge may,\nin advance to the hearing, dispense with the need for the attorney(s) to be present\nat Court and, in which event; the other provisions of this practice direction will\napply accordingly.\n9.5 Video conference (or telephonic) CMC's may not be recorded without the\nconsent of the Judge. If the Judge permits or directs that the CMC be recorded,\nthe Judge will direct that a written transcript be prepared, sent to the judge for\napproval and circulated amongst the parties. Whenever a CMC is not recorded,\nthe note taken or approved by the Judge will constitute the official record.\n9.6 Hearing dates may be fixed by the Judge during the course of a CMC and, in\nappropriate cases, CMCs may be convened for the principal purpose of fixing\nthe date for the trial or further hearings.\n10. Availability of the Judges of the FSD\n\n1 Direction 8.4 recognises the authority given by Rule 6(5) (with the approval of Cabinet) for the ordering of abatement of fees\nwhile also recognising that section 41(ba) of the Public Management and Finance Act (2018 Revision) provides that ''.4 ministry\nor portfolio shall not - (ba) waive any revenues\".\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 2 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 373\n\n10.1 Judges of the FSD may conduct CMCs and, in appropriate cases, hear\nsummonses for directions and other interlocutory applications by means of\ntelephone or video conferences when they are off the Island.\n10.2 Paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 above shall apply to any hearing which takes place by\ntelephone or video conference.\n10.3 As explained at [11) of Practice Direction 6 of 2020 Trials of any FSD cause or\nmatter or any question or issue arising therein, may take place in the United\nKingdom. This will continue until further notice.\n10.4 Practice Directions 6 and 6A of 2020 will continue to apply generally to FSD\ncauses or matters until further notice.\n11. This Practice Direction shall come into force on the 13th day of April, 2022. With\neffect from 13th day of April, 2022 Practice Direction No. 1 of 2021 is revoked.\n\n12 April 2022\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 374\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\nJUDICIAL MEDIATION GUIDELINES\n\nPurpose\n1.\nThe Courts of the Cayman Islands are committed to resolving disputes in the most\nefficient manner possible, including the use of non-adjudicative processes.\nAccordingly, Judges and Magistrates will in appropriate cases encourage parties to\nengage in mediation.\n2.\nBy the Overiding Objective the Court's duty is to manage cases so as to help the\nparties to settle the whole or part of the proceedings. To this end several members of\nthe judiciary have been trained and certified as mediators. They are ably supported\nby a professionally trained co-ordinator.\n3.\nThe purpose of this practice note is to set out the guidelines for the referral of matters\nto judicial mediation and the procedures for the conduct of judicial mediations in\nother than family cases. The mediation procedure applicable to the Family Division\nwill continue to apply.\n\nReferral to Judicial Mediation\n4.\nA matter may be referred by the Court to judicial mediation at any stage in the\nproceeding in keeping with the Overriding Objective, the MIAMs procedure in the\nFamily Division of the Grand Court and Practice Direction 4 of 2022 on the Listing\nof Civil Proceedings in the Civil Division Short Summonses and Assigned Judges.\n5.\nBy virtue of section 29 of the Grand Court Act, a judge acting as a judicial mediator\nhas the same immunity as a judge acting judicially.\n\nCriteria for Referral to Judicial Mediation\n6.\nA matter referred to mediation will usually have one or more of the following\nfeatures:\n\u2022\nan earlier unsuccessful private mediation;\n\u2022\none or more parties with limited resources;\n\u2022\na substantial risk that the costs and time of a trial would be disproportionately\nhigh compared to the amount in dispute or the subject matter of the dispute;\n\u2022\nan estimated trial length that would occupy substantial judicial and other court\nresources; or\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 375\n\n\u2022\naspects that otherwise make it in the interests of justice that the matter be\nreferred to judicial mediation.\n7.\nThere are proceedings which, as a matter of policy, may not be appropriate for\nmediation. The following disputes will not ordinarily be referred for mediation:\n\u2022\ncases involving the resolution of a matter of public importance which, in the\npublic interest, ought to be heard in open court;\n\u2022\ncases in which the Court is to review the exercise of a statutory power or\ndiscretion;\n\u2022\ncases in which the commission of a crime or serious misconduct is alleged in\nthe context of a civil proceeding; and\n\u2022\ncases in which there is a litigant in person.\n\nPreparation for the judicial mediation\n8.\nDirections regarding preparation for the mediation will be made at a MIAM or\npreliminary case conference.\n9.\nThe parties will be told when and where the mediation will take place and who is to\nattend. Parties will usually be provided with a statement of the proposed course of the\nmediation. Representatives are welcome to attend.\n10. Parties will be informed prior to the commencement of a mediation of any preconditions, expectations or particular requirements. These may include a requirement\nto provide specified documents and other information, position papers or confidential\noffers.\n\nConfidentiality\n11. Parties and other participants are to protect the confidentiality of all that is said and\ndone by any person in the course of the conduct of a mediation.\n12. It will be the usual practice of the mediator to destroy all materials provided to or\nprepared by the mediator and any other court officer participating in the mediation,\nfollowing completion of the mediation, whether successful or not.\n\nAttendance at mediations\n13. A mediator may authorise the attendance at a mediation of persons other than the\nparties and their legal representatives. Participation of all persons in the mediation\nwill be under the direction and control of the mediator.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 376\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n14. In the absence of the mediator's express authorisation to the contrary, it is expected\nthat the mediation will be attended by parties or representatives of the parties who\nhave full authority to settle the proceeding. Participation by telephone or video-link\nwill be allowed only in exceptional circumstances.\n15. The mediator will inform the parties of the identity of all attendees prior to the\ncommencement of the mediation.\n\nLegal advice or assistance\n16. A A mediator will not evaluate issues in dispute or provide legal advice to parties,\nand will not assist with the preparation of any terms of settlement. When agreement\nis reached the mediator may give guidance for the settling of the terms of agreement\n16.B. The settled tenns of agreement, may with the consent of the parties, be embodied in\nan order of the Court to be executed by the mediator in that mediator\u2019s judicial\ncapacity and in which event, will become binding as such.\n\nMeeting Separately with the Parties - Caucusing\n17. Mediation styles and practices will differ between judicial mediators. Some mediators\nmay be prepared to caucus, depending on the nature and circumstances of the case.\nOther mediators may not be prepared to do so.\n18. A mediator will not meet separately with a party and their legal representatives, or\nwith the legal representatives of a party, in the absence of some or all of the other\nparties, without the express approval of all parties to the mediation.\n19. Information provided by a party to a mediator in a separate session will not be\ndisclosed to any other party unless the mediator has been expressly authorised to do\nso. This will not restrict the mediator from terminating the mediation upon receiving\ninformation which by its nature is open to an interpretation of illegal, improper or\nunethical conduct.\n\nAdjournment\n20. A mediator may adjourn the mediation to continue at a later date, either under the\nconduct of the same or a different mediator.\n21. If the proceeding fails to settle at mediation, the mediator may give directions for the\nfurther conduct of the proceeding in their capacity as a judge or associate judge.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 3 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 377\n\nSubsequent trial\n22. No member of the Court will hear and determine an issue in a proceeding in which\nthat person acted as a mediator, or where that person has become acquainted with any\nconfidential information relating to the mediation of the dispute (e.g. where\nconfidential information was provided in preparation for a mediation that was\nsubsequently conducted by another judicial officer.\n\n15 August 2022\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 378\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022\nLISTING OF CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIVIL DIVISION, SHORT\nSUMMONSES AND ASSIGNED JUDGES\n\n1.\nApplication and Commencement\n\nThis Practice Direction applies to civil proceedings other than proceedings in the\nFamily Division which are covered by Practice Direction No. 6\/12 and proceedings\nin the Financial Services Division which are covered by Practice Direction No. I of\n2021 (\"Civil Proceedings\").\n\n2.\nShort Summonses\n2.1 This Practice Direction will take effect from 1st October 2022 and will apply to\nevery interlocutory summons issued pursuant to GCR O.32 having endorsed\nupon it a time estimate of\u00bd hour or less (hereafter called a \"Short Summons\").\n2.2 The presiding judge in the Civil Division (currently Madame Justice RamsayHale) (the \"Presiding Judge\") will sit on Thursday of each week (commencing\n6th October 2022) for the purpose of hearing Short Summonses and the listing\nofficer shall list Short Summonses to be heard on such days of the week.\n2.3 Parties are reminded of GCR O.32, r.(2) (4) which imposes a duty to notify the\nListing officer if, for whatever reason, the time estimate is no longer considered\nto be accurate.\n2.4 Applications for consent orders should only be made by Short Summons if the\norder involves the exercise of a judicial discretion. If the parties are entitled to\nthe order as of right, it should be processed administratively in accordance with\nGCR O.42, r.(5) and (5)A.\n2.5 Summonses with a time estimate of more than \u00bd hour shall continue to be listed\nby the Listing Officer in the usual way.\n\n3.\nAssignment of cases to judges\n3.1 In order to maximise the efficiency and cost effectiveness with which Civil\nCases are dealt with in the Grand Court consideration will be given by the\nPresiding Judge on a continuing basis, in conjunction with the Chief Justice as\nappropriate, as to whether cases that are more time consuming or complex\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 4 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 379\n\n(\"Complex Cases\") will benefit from being assigned to a particular judge (the\n\"Assigned Judge\").\n3.2 This decision may be taken early in the life of a case e.g. at the inter-partes\nhearing of an injunction, on an application for leave for judicial review pursuant\nto GCR O. r. 53, r.3, at the hearing of a summons for directions issued pursuant\nto GCR O. 25, r.l (1) or, as the matter progresses towards or is set down for trial.\n3.3 If a party considers that it would be inappropriate for a matter to be assigned to\na particular judge, for whatever reason, this fact should be drawn to the attention\nof the Presiding Judge at the time.\n3.4 If a Complex Case is allocated to an Assigned Judge then the Listing Officer\nwill be so informed and, thereafter, unless a matter is urgent and the Assigned\nJudge is unavailable, after consultation with the Assigned Judge the Listing\nOfficer will ensure that interlocutory summonses and, the trial itself, will be\nlisted before the Assigned Judge.\n3.5 In accordance with the Overriding Objective as set out in the preamble to the\nGrand Court Rules (as amended and revised), the Assigned Judge will be\nexpected to consider, at all times, how best to manage the Complex Cases which\nare assigned to them and to exercise appropriate and proportionate case\nmanagement powers as they shall think fit including, in consultation with the\nparties via the Listing Officer, convening case management conferences and\ngiving directions pursuant to e.g. GCR O.25, r.3 and GCR O.28, r.4.\n3.6 The allocation of a particular Complex Case to an Assigned Judge shall remain\na matter for the Presiding Civil Judge in consultation with the Chief Justice and\nshall remain within their discretion to change if that becomes necessary, for\nwhatever reason.\n3.7 Matters that are not designated as Complex Cases shall remain to be heard by\nany available judge.\n\n15 August 2022\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 380\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022\nPROCEDURE RELATING TO THE COMMENCEMENT AND\nMANAGEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE\nLEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT (as amended and revised)\n\n1.\nBy virtue of section 7(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised)\n(\"LPA''), Judges of the Grand Court are vested with the authority, for reasonable\ncause shown, to suspend an attorney-at-law from practicing or to order that that\nperson\u2019s name be struck off the Court Roll.\n2.\nA judge charged with the responsibility to determine a disciplinary complaint may\nnot be the same person who determines whether or not disciplinary charges are to be\ninstituted. See in this regard, the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Attorney \"A\" v\nThe Attorney General C\/CA {Civil) Appeal No. 13 of 2021 (\"LPDC 1 of 2017\"} 27\nOctober 2021.\n3.\nThis Practice Direction explains the procedure which will be engaged when a\ndisciplinary complaint is made against an attorney. The procedure will involve the\nChief Justice as head of the Judiciary and the Attorney General (the latter as ex officio\nhead of the legal profession of the Cayman Islands pursuant to section 25 of the Grand\nCourt Act (as amended and revised) and as representative of the Crown in the Courts\nin all matters in which rights of a public character come into question).\n4.\nWhen a complaint about the conduct of an attorney is received, whether from a judge,\na client of that attorney, another attorney or other third party, it shall be referred to\nthe Chief Justice. The Chief Justice will consult with the Attorney General and\nconsider whether, prima facie, the conduct described in the complaint may warrant\nthe commencement of proceedings under section 7 of the LPA in the public interest.\nIf, after consultation with the Attorney General, the Chief Justice considers that there\nis no case to answer this will be communicated to the complainant and no further\nsteps will be taken.\n5.\nIf the Chief Justice, after consultation with the Attorney General, is of the view that\nthere is a prima facie case against the attorney, the Chief Justice (if necessary with\nthe assistance of the Attorney General or the Attorney Genernal\u2019s designate) will\nconsider the charges to be made against the attorney and will afford the attorney an\nopportunity to explain in writing within 14 days (or such longer period as the Chief\nJustice shall provide) why the charge(s) should not be pursued.\n6.\nAfter further consultation with the Attorney General if the Chief Justice remains of\nthe view that charge(s) should proceed the Chief Justice will ask the Solicitor General\nto draft a Notice of Originating Motion setting out the charges and the basis therefor.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 5 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 381\n\n7.\nThe Notice of Originating Motion will not be placed on the Register of Writs and\nother Originating Process open to public inspection and will instead be placed on the\nRestricted Register of Writs and Other Originating Processes. While the Notice of\nOriginating Motion is on the Restricted Register it will be open to public inspection\nonly with the leave of the Court.\n8.\nThe Notice of Originating Motion will be allocated to a judge other than the Chief\nJustice.\n9.\nThe Solicitor General will cause the Notice of Originating Motion to be filed and\nserved on the subject attorney and the Attorney General and the matter shall then\nproceed in accordance with the Grand Court Rules.\n10. Proceedings under section 7 of the Legal Practitioners Act (as amended and revised)\nwill be heard in private, and pleadings and documents anonymised, until the Court\notherwise orders.\n11. The burden and standard of proof shall be the same as in criminal proceedings.\n12. If an order is made suspending an attorney, or striking an attorney's name from the\nRoll, the Court shall direct the date on which the proceedings in which the order is\nmade shall cease to be private. On this date, or as soon as reasonably practicable\nthereafter, the Clerk of the Court shall place the Notice of Originating Motion on the\nRegister of Writs and Originating Process and the judgment on the Register of\nJudgments.\n13. Throughout the proceedings the Attorney General or Solicitor General or a designate\nshall act as amicus curiae in that person\u2019s capacity as custodian of the public interest\nand ex officio head of the legal profession under section 25 of the Grand Court Act\n(as amended and revised).\n14. EFFECTIVE DATE\nThe Practice Direction shall come into effect on the 31 August 2022\n\n15 August 2022\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 382\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO CRIMINAL COURTS\n\nINTRODUCTION\n1.\nOpen justice and the transparency of the legal process are fundamental tenets of the\nCayman legal system. Public access in respect of criminal proceedings is an aspect of\nand administered in accordance with this open justice principle; however, it is subject\nto limitations as recognised in law. The courts have inherent jurisdiction to determine\nhow the principle should be applied in particular cases.\n2.\nFair and accurate reporting of proceedings is encouraged as integral to the Rule of\nLaw and the Courts will continue to have regard to the open justice principle in\nconsidering the use of technology and access by the media.\n3.\nWhere a representative of the media requests access to material referred to in a court\nproceeding, there is a presumption in favour of providing access, in recognition of the\nrole of the press as 'public watchdog' in a democratic society. The purpose of media\naccess is to enable the public to understand and scrutinise the justice system\n4.\nThe presumption in favour of granting access does not mean that representatives of\nthe media are 'entitled to disclosure', or that it should take place 'by default'. Not all\ndocuments need or may be provided. The assigned or sitting Judge or Magistrate (\"the\nAppropriate Judicial Officer\") may refuse access where there are compelling reasons\nagainst it. The presumption of providing access is capable of rebuttal for good and\njustifiable countervailing reason. Each decision must be reached on a case-by-case\nand document-by-document basis.\n\nMEDIA REPRESENTATIVES\n5.\nFor the purposes of this Practice Direction, a representative of the media is a registrant\non the Courts Media Register (a \"Registrant\") or such other person as a Judge or\nMagistrate may, in that person\u2019s discretion, grant temporary recognition as a\nrepresentative of a media outlet.\n\nGENERAL RULE\n6.\nIn accordance with the Constitution, criminal proceedings are generally held in\npublic, save in such special and limited cases as may be prescribed by law or\ndetermined in interests of justice. Section 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code (as\namended and revised) (the \"Code\") provides that the place in which a criminal court\nsits to try or hear proceedings relating to an offence shall generally be an open court.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 383\n\nHearings must accordingly be held in a place accessible to the public without physical\nbarrier so that members of the public, which expression includes representatives of\nthe media, may enter without appointment.\n7.\nSection 7(10) of the Bill of Rights scheduled to the Cayman Islands Constitution\nOrder 2009 and Section IO of the Code also provide for discretionary powers to\nexclude the public generally or particular persons from the place or proceedings for a\nnumber of reasons, including when necessary to safeguard court proceedings or the\nintegrity of the justice system.\n8.\nThe principles that apply to hearings in private apply also to the anonymisation of a\nparty or witness. The court may order that the identity of any party or witness must\nnot be disclosed if it considers non-disclosure necessary in order to protect the\ninterests of that party or witness.\n9.\nWhen such powers are exercised, reasons for their exercise shall be given publicly\nwith appropriate opportunity provided for representations by affected persons. The\ncourt may receive such representations orally or in writing and determine the issue:\n9.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or\n9.2. without a hearing;\n9.3. applications for anonymity or screening of witnesses should be heard in public\nsave in exceptional circumstances in the interests of the administration of\njustice, such as when the prosecution may appropriately apply ex parte and\nwithout notice pursuant to section 7 of the Criminal Evidence (Witness\nAnonymity Act) (2014 Revision), for an anonymity order.\n\nLIVE STREAMING\n10. Access to open court hearings may, if practical and appropriate and insofar as the\nintegrity of proceedings can be safeguarded, be by live streaming. Live streaming is\nnot to be regarded as the norm or as a right but may be a discretionary supplement to\nthe usual court access that underlies the open justice principle. Where available a live\nstream will be accessible outside the precincts of the Courts to Registrants by way of\nencrypted access.\n\nCourt of Appeal\n\nWhether or not proceedings are live streamed is a matter for the discretion of the\nCourt taking into account the particular circumstances of the case. Typically, since\nthe onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in order to ensure public access remotely and in\nkeeping with Practice Direction 7 of 2020, appeals to the Court of Appeal are live-\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 384\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nstreamed and available for public view on the Judicial Website. The nature of appeals\ndiffers from that of proceedings at first instance in that appeals are usually confined\nto legal argument and thus the considerations may differ. Nonetheless, there may be\ncases in which that is not so or, for a variety of reasons, the Court of Appeal may\ndecide that particular appeals will not be live-streamed. As in other Courts, the\nwarning required by paragraph 15 below will apply.\n\nREPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEDIA\n12. Representatives of the media may apply to the Court to receive remote access to Court\nproceedings by way oflive stream as an alternative to sitting in the courtroom. There\nis no entitlement to do so, and each case will be decided on its merits by the\nAppropriate Judicial Officer taking into account, inter alia, cost and practicality. If a\nlive stream is available it will be accessible by way of the media portal on the Judicial\nWebsite and with use of a password and all parties to the proceedings in court shall\nbe notified that live streaming has been permitted.\n13. Applications from representatives of the media and others to observe a hearing\nremotely should be made in advance to allow for inclusion during hearing setup. Such\napplications should be made to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal), the Clerk\nof the Court, or such other person as they shall designate (the \"Administrative\nOfficer\"). These applications will usually be considered at any case management\nhearing.\n\nOVERFLOW CASES\n14. At the Court's discretion, live streaming may be permitted outside the courtroom but\nwithin the precincts of the Court to maximise public access. This may be in\ncircumstances, for example, in a case of great public interest where the courtroom\nproves insufficient to accommodate all who wish to attend. If and when a public\ngallery is available elsewhere, the Judge or Magistrate may permit live streaming as\nan exceptional measure. It is not to be taken as the usual course when the public\ngallery in a courtroom cannot accommodate all who wish to attend. The open justice\nprinciple will usually be satisfied if there is public access to an open court.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 385\n\n15. Where live streaming is available, recording of the stream is prohibited without\nexpress consent of the Court. Those allowed to observe a hearing remotely are\nreminded that it will be a contempt of court to make unauthorised recordings of the\nproceedings or to use or to allow the use of such recordings to interfere with the\nadministration of justice. In keeping with section 111 of the Penal Code (as amended\nand revised) and established practice, where such proceedings are being live\nstreamed, a warning note shall be included at the bottom of the screen in the course\nof the streaming to this effect: \"This is a formal court proceeding in respect of which\nthe usual rules as set out in Practice Direction 1 of 2014 apply. No photographs,\nfilming, recordings, or dissemination may be made except with the approval of the\nCourt.\"\n\nRESTRICTIONS ON CASE INFORMATION IN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES\n16. The Courts may hold proceedings in private and place restrictions on access to court\ndocuments or reporting when necessary, in the interests of the administration of\njustice or as otherwise prescribed by law. For example, names may be redacted in\njudgments, rulings, or orders. Cases in which the Courts' jurisdiction to hear evidence\nin private may be exercised and\/or redaction may be necessary include those where\nthere is a risk of:\n16.1. prejudicing law enforcement action or the administration of justice, (which\nincludes risk of disruption);\n16.2. affecting national security;\n16.3. putting anyone's safety at risk;\n16.4. identifying an anonymous witness. It is an offence to disclose information in\ncontravention to a witness anonymity order pursuant to the Criminal Evidence\n(Witness Anonymity) Act (as amended and revised);\n16.5. identifying young persons;\n16.6. breaching the prohibition imposed by section 31 of the Criminal Procedure\nCode (as amended and revised) upon the reporting of the identity of a\ncomplainant in a rape case;\n16.7. breaching medical confidentiality;\n16.8. breaching legal privilege;\n16.9. contravening the protection of personal information (particularly in the case of\nthe vulnerable) which is sensitive or if disclosed could give rise to a risk of harm;\nor\n16.10.\nbreaching a contempt of Court order.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 386\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSuch decisions as to restrictions or redactions are judicial decisions and can only be\ntaken on a case-by-case basis within legal proceedings.\n17. A rationale for decisions protecting information that is sensitive or could give rise to\na risk of harm or be damaging or would breach any right of confidence (especially\nfor the vulnerable such as young persons or the mentally disabled) is that there is no\nobvious public interest in public disclosure.\n18. In any case in which an embargo on the publication of open court proceedings is\nconsidered necessary for the proper administration of justice, the Court will give\nreasons, if practical in writing, and seek to ensure that the public and representatives\nof the press are notified of the embargo to avoid the risk of non-compliance.\n19. Judges should consider at the end of each hearing, with a view to possible future\nrequests for a recording, transcript, or inspection, whether a note should be made for\nthe case file to indicate that redaction may be necessary.\n\nPOSTPONEMENT OF REPORTING\n20. In criminal cases, broadcasting or otherwise reporting on proceedings may be\nsuspended in the interests of justice, for example, to prevent transmission to\nsubsequent witnesses or otherwise compromise proceedings.\n21. Subject to the limited exceptions to an open hearing (referred to in this Practice\nDirection) or as otherwise specified in relevant legislation, legal argument before a\nJudge will be held in public. It may be in the absence of the jury if there is one but in\nthe presence of representatives of the media, and this will usually be subject to an\norder for delayed reporting. Where there is a jury, the Judge will usually order that\nmedia publication of this part of the proceedings (legal submissions in absence of\njury) be postponed until the jury have reached their conclusion. This would usually\nbe on the ground that there is a risk of substantial prejudice to the administration of\njustice because the jury might read about the submissions and be improperly\ninfluenced by them.\n\nPUBLIC NOTICE OF HEARINGS\n22. An Administrative Officer shall no later than in the week before each hearing of an\noffence in the Grand Court and the day before each hearing of an offence in the\nSummary Court cause to be published on the Judicial Website and\/or in the public\nprecincts of the Court a listing containing the following information in relation to\ncases:\n22.1. The name of the defendant;\n22.2. The Indictment or charge number, as appropriate;\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 387\n\n22.3. The nature of the charge or indictment and of the hearing;\n22.4. The court in which the hearing is to take place;\n22.5. The name of the Judge or Magistrate assigned to that Court.\n23. In the event that any matter is brought before a court in circumstances that make such\npublication impossible within the specified timeframe, the Administrative Officer\nshall cause publication to be made as soon as possible.\n\nPUBLICATION OF REGISTER OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS ON THE\nJUDICIAL WEBSITE\n24. Subject to redaction or other exclusion in the interests of justice or otherwise\nprescribed by law, directed or ordered in accordance with this Practice Direction, the\nfollowing case information shall be published on the Judicial Website or otherwise\nbe available to the public:\n24.l. Charges and indictments;\n24.2. Final orders, directions, rulings and judgments;\n24.3. Applications for orders or directions (excluding factual material);\n24.4. The dates of public hearings;\n24.5. The Judge or Magistrate by whom a decision, order direction or judgment at a\npublic hearing was made;\n24.6. Summary of Allegations.\n\nEMBARGO OR RESTRICTION ON PUBLICATION\n25. [n cases in which a restriction on publication is prescribed by law (for example, in\ncases involving children) the prosecutor shall supply the Deputy Clerk of the Court\n(Criminal) with a copy of the relevant document suitably redacted or anonymised to\nbe published on the Judicial Website or otherwise.\n26. In other cases, where a prosecutor or defendant seeks to omit, redact, anonymise or\ndelay the publication of any information required by paragraph 22 or 24, that\nprosecutor shall apply in writing, providing to the Deputy Clerk of the Court\n(Criminal), in a timely manner, details of the proposed omission and\/or a draft of any\nproposed redaction or anonymisation and\/or what information should be subject to\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 388\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n delay in publication. The application should be accompanied by reasons that it is\ncontrary to law or the interests of justice for the full information to be published or\nfor there to be a delay in such publication. An Administrative Officer shall forthwith\nplace the matter before the Appropriate Judicial Officer for decision. The Appropriate\nJudicial Officer shall consider the extent to which it is appropriate to allow timely\nrepresentations from any other party and when and to whom reasons for the decision\nshould be given.\n\nOFFICIAL RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS\n27. A recording is deemed to be a document for the purposes of this Practice Direction.\n28. A recording of proceedings will be kept in accordance with established court practices\nand the National Archives and Public Records Act (as amended and revised) as\namended or revised and policies made thereunder.\n29. Court stenographers are engaged to provide the verbatim records of proceedings in\nGrand Court in criminal cases. In Summary Court, the notes kept by the Chief\nMagistrate and Magistrates will continue to comprise the official record of procedures\nuntil an official digital recording system is engaged.\n30. Transcripts in criminal appeals are provided to parties only where truly necessary for\nthe preparation and presentation of an appeal. Preparation of transcripts is\nburdensome and costly. Neither the public nor the media has an entitlement to a\ntranscript. Transcripts of criminal proceedings whether in the Grand Court or\nSummary Courts are not routinely made. See Practice Direction 3 of 2017 (Court\nStenographer Services) and Court of Appeal Rules (as amended and revised) rule\n33A.\n31. Where transcripts of open court hearings are (I) available or (2) otherwise sought for\ngood reason, copies (or extracts) may, subject to direction or order, be obtained on\napplication to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal) explaining the purpose to\nwhich the transcript will be put and on payment of the prescribed fee. The Judge or\nMagistrate shall determine whether or not provision of the same will be\ndisproportionately costly or burdensome. The Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal) shall\nkeep a written record by way of receipt that a transcript has been provided and to\nwhom and on what date.\n\nTEXT-BASED COMMUNICATIONS, RECORDINGS, PHOTOGRAPHS\n32. Readers are reminded that the Practice Guidance issued with Practice Direction 1 of\n2014 remains in force as amplified by this Practice Direction.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 389\n\n33. Unless otherwise specifically ordered, live text-based communications by legal\ncommentators or registered representatives of the media for the sole purpose of fair\nand accurate reporting are permitted at all public heatings. Phones, laptops, and other\nelectronic devices must be used silently. Unregistered representatives of the media\nand legal commentators shall be required to identify themselves as such before or at\nthe outset of the relevant hearing and may be required to produce evidence of their\nstatus and identity. The Court shalI have discretion as to whether such status should\nbe recognised and whether or not a proper journalistic or legal commentary purpose\nis served.\n34. Other members of the public who wish to make records in this way must apply for\npermission to the Judge or Magistrate charged with the conduct of the hearing\n35. Except as set out above, mobile phones and other recording electronic devices must\nbe switched off.\n36. No sound recording may be taken except with the permission of the Judge or\nMagistrate charged with conduct of the hearing. Where appropriate the Judge or\nMagistrate may permit a legal commentator or registered representative of the media\nto record proceedings. In all cases in which a recording of proceedings is allowed, it\nshall be permitted only so long as it is used as an aide memoire to fair and accurate\nreporting; the recording must not be broadcast or used for any other purpose. It will\nbe a matter for the Court to decide whether or not a proper journalistic or legal\ncommentary purpose is served.\n37. Photographs or other images, still or moving, in court or within the precincts of the\ncourt are not permitted. Jurors and vulnerable parties and witnesses, especially, must\nbe protected from publicity.\n\nINSPECTING A COURT FILE BY AN ATTORNEY, DEFENDANT IN PERSON,\nOR YOUNG PERSON\n38. Where an attorney is on record for a defendant or a defendant acts in person, that\nperson shall be allowed to review case documents, upon satisfying the Administrative\nOfficer as to that person\u2019s status, without having to complete a formal application. In\nthe event that a document is within the categories set out in paragraph 61 herein or by\ndirection or order made in accordance with this Practice Direction redacted or\notherwise excluded in the interests of justice or as prescribed by law, the\nAdministrative Officer shall before such review consult with the Appropriate Judicial\nOfficer as to the appropriate course.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 390\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n39. An affected Young Person, that person\u2019s parents, legal guardian(s), other person in\nloco parentis and attorneys of record may inspect and\/or obtain copies of select Youth\nCourt documents (or documents in other Court proceedings affecting the Young\nPerson) by making application in writing in Form [l]. There may be a risk that the\ninterests of another Young Person are thereby prejudiced and in such a case or in\nrespect of any document that may fall within the categories set out in paragraph 61\nherein, the Administrative Officer shall consult with the Appropriate Judicial Officer\nbefore granting the application. Photo identification and other documents deemed\nappropriate might be requested to confirm the identity of the applicant before\nallowing the viewing of a Youth Court document. Youth Court documents will not\nbe emailed.\n40. The Administrative Officer will arrange by agreement with the applicant a suitable\nand timely date and time to view case documents.\n\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO MATERIAL IN PROCEEDINGS\n41. As set out in paragraphs 22 and 24 herein, information will be published on the\nJudicial Website. Application for other information and material may involve\nsignificant clerical and judicial time. The open justice principle is not unlimited and\nas explained there may be countervailing principles or rights that outweigh it in a\nparticular case. Open justice forms part of the overriding principle that justice must\nbe done. The principle serves two primary purposes: namely, to enable public scrutiny\nof court decisions and to enable the public to understand how the justice system works\nand why decisions are taken.\n42. The Court does not itself retain all case documents. Some may, for example, be\nreturned to the prosecution. Typically, the Court will return non-documentary\nexhibits, in particular, to the prosecution for retention in accordance with the Rules.\nThus, access granted by the Court on application relates to court records, namely\nthose records retained by the Court.\n43. Not all records retained by the Court are accessible or disclosable. Materials may be\ndisclosed in a case but not referenced in the proceedings, and so may not be\naccessible. Some records may have personal annotations made merely for ease of\nreference by the Judge or Magistrate; such annotations are therefore not accessible.\nAccess will usually be granted to material actually seen or referred to in the course of\nthe proceedings, including documents such as maps, photographs, CCTV footage,\naudio, and videotapes. Accessible documents may, with leave of the Court, include\napplications and supporting evidence for witness anonymity that may be\nappropriately redacted. They may also include skeleton arguments and written legal\nsubmissions that have been referred to in Court but may be redacted or anonymised\nby order of the Court upon representations from and with the involvement of counsel.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 391\n\n44. Where a witness has given evidence, observing the testimony given in open court is\nusually sufficient for open justice purposes. The written statement of the witness is\nnot evidence and need not be provided. Parts of statements (and other documents) are\noften not read out because of their sensitive nature. Where a witness statement (or\nother document) has been referred to by the Judge or Magistrate and relied on for a\nruling or conclusion but not read out, access to the Judgment will usually be sufficient\nfor an understanding of the salient aspects of the witness statement.\n45. It will be a matter for the Appropriate Judicial Officer to decide in such cases whether\nto provide the statement or other document (redacted or otherwise). Where the\nAppropriate Judicial Officer considers it appropriate, that Judicial Officer may permit\na representative of the media to see the whole of a witness statement but only on the\ncondition that those parts not read out (and not relied on) may not be used or reported.\n46. A member of the public (including a representative of the media) may be permitted\nto take a photograph on a hand-held device of a document as a copy in lieu of\nphotocopying on payment of a reasonable cost as may be prescribed. Redaction may\nbe necessary and again a reasonable cost may be charged for the same.\nMEDIA ACCESS\n47. Where possible, rulings that are likely to affect reporting should be decided at an early\nstage. The parties should if practicable raise any issue relating to restriction of access,\nredaction, or other limits on reporting at case management hearings, so that, should\nthe media wish to challenge them, they may do so at the time.\n48. Judges and Magistrates should, so long as it does not interfere with the administration\nof justice, give the media, on request, the opportunity to make representations on\nmatters that are of importance to them. Where time permits, representations should\nbe reduced to writing prior to oral submissions. In appropriate cases, the Court may\nallow a defendant to be heard on the issues, in which instance the procedure whenever\ndetermined may be treated as pait of the proceedings.\n49. Making requests during the course of proceedings, particularly at a time of sensitive\nevidence, may be disruptive to the proceedings and place a great burden on the Court.\nIt may also distress others. Representatives of the media have a responsibility to take\nthis into account and minimise requests that may be time- consuming and distracting\nfrom the purpose of any hearing.\n50. In complex or high-profile cases, Judges and Magistrates should consider at a case\nmanagement hearing whether any special arrangements need to be made for media\nrepresentation, including:\n50.1. the provision or copying of relevant documents;\n50.2. special seating arrangements;\n50.3. overflow room facilities; and\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 392\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n50.4. how any day-to-day requests from the media may be managed without\nunnecessary interuption to the proceedings.\n51. Representatives of the media should, if they wish for special arrangements to be\nmade, submit written representations well in advance of the case management hearing\nand should be permitted to make oral representation at the hearing.\n\nAPP LI CATIONS FOR SUPPLY OF INFORMATION ABOUT PROCEEDINGS\n52. Unless expressly otherwise specified in this Practice Direction, when by Form [2]\naddressed to the Deputy Clerk of the Court (Criminal) specifying, in particular, the\ninformation requested and shall pay any fee prescribed. A non-party applying for\naccess to material must explain why such access will advance the open justice\nprinciple.\n53. Such applications will be considered on their merit, taking into account the open\njustice principle and the imperative of avoiding disproportionately burdensome and\ncostly disclosure. If the Court holds documents that have not been referenced in Court\nor adduced in evidence, these need not be disclosed. The public and representatives\nof the media are not entitled to see documents not referred to or used in open Court.\nThe Administrative Officer may determine the identity and status of an unregistered\napplicant seeking case information or requesting inspection of case documents.\n54. In all cases the open justice principle requires that all applications be dealt with in a\ntimely manner.\n55. These provisions are without prejudice to the paragraphs herein relating to Recording\nof Proceedings.\n56. In appropriate circumstances, the Administrative Officer will-\n56.1. supply to the applicant, by word-of-mouth or in writing, information about the\ncase; or\n56.2. allow the applicant to inspect or copy a document, or part of a document (on\npayment of the prescribed fee), containing information about the case.\n57. Viewing case documents may be by inspection of hard copy, Zoom or other electronic\ncommunication or other means deemed by the court to be appropriate.\n58. In any case the Court may determine an application:\n58.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or\n58.2. without a hearing.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 393\n\nProvision not requiring Written Application\n59. Provided that in a case in which the information sought is that set out in paragraphs\n22 or 24 herein and for some reason the information is not still on the Judicial\nWebsite, the application may be oral. In such a case the Administrative Officer shall\nrecord on the case file the application, when and by whom it was made and the\noutcome of the application.\n60. The Administrative Officer, subject to any direction or Court order to the contrary in\nrespect of the same, shall supply-by word-of-mouth or by direction to the Judicial\nWebsite-information as to:\n60.l. the date of any public hearing (unless any party has yet to be notified of that\ndate);\n60.2. the alleged offence, charge or indictment and any plea entered;\n60.3. the court's decision in a public hearing;\n60.4. the Judge or Magistrate by whom a decision, order, direction, or judgment at a\npublic hearing was made;\n60.5. whether the case is under appeal;\n60.6. Summary of Allegations\n\nClosed materials\n61. The following documents shall not be open to inspection without written permission\nof the Appropriate Judicial Officer:\n61.1. Public Interest Immunity material, so deemed by order of the Court;\n61.2. A document that was sealed by current order of the Court at any stage in criminal\nproceedings;\n61.3. Files relating to sexual offences and witness statements involving the evidence\nof witnesses in firearms cases.\n61.4. Youth Court cases;\n61.5. Witness statements of those subject to witness anonymity orders or in cases\ninvolving the same;\n61.6. Letters or communications presented to the Judge or Magistrate for\nconsideration but not adduced into evidence;\n61.7. Medical, Probation or social enquiry reports;\n61.8. Any other document that is not in the public domain;\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 394\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n62. The Administrative Officer in any case to which paragraphs 16 or 61 herein apply or\nmay apply shall seek direction from the Appropriate Judicial Officer.\n63. Before permission for disclosure is given in such a case, opportunity shall be given\nto the Director of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make\nrepresentations.\nReasons for Refusal\n64. In refusing an application for disclosure the Appropriate Judicial Officer should give\nbriefreasons and refer to:\n64.1. The application;\n64.2. The nature of the material requested;\n64.3. Whether the application has 'legitimate journalistic purpose';\n64.4. The principle of open justice and relevant Constitutional Rights;\n64.5. Any presumption in favour of disclosure;\n64.6. The countervailing reasons against disclosure;\n64.7. The refusal of the application;\n64.8. The grounds for refusal.\n\nAPPLICATIONS BY \"PERSONS AFFECTED\" PURSUANT TO SECTION 193 OF\nTHE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE\n65. Applicants are reminded that certain categories of information are published on the\nJudicial Website. Applications for provision of a copy of an order, ruling, judgment,\ndeposition, or other part of a record of proceedings under the Code pursuant to section\n193 of the Code shall be by Form [3] addressed to the Deputy Clerk of the Court\n(Criminal).\n66. The applicant shall therein identify the basis upon which that applicant applies as a\nperson affected and provide such proof as is reasonably requested. The applicant\nshould explain why the already published information is insufficient. The\nAdministrative Officer shall, as appropriate, seek direction from the Appropriate\nJudicial Officer.\n67. The Administrative Officer shall thereafter provide the document or record to a\nperson affected so long as that Administrative Officer is satisfied or directed that such\nprovision is in the interests of justice and is not otherwise precluded by law.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 395\n\n68. In any case to which paragraph 61 applies, before the Appropriate Judicial Officer\ngrants permission to provide the information, opportunity shall be given to the\nDirector of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make\nrepresentations.\n69. In any case, the Court may determine an application:\n69.1. at a hearing, in public or in private; or\n69.2. without a hearing.\n\nTIMELINE\n70. Pursuant to this Practice Direction case information will be published on the Judicial\nWebsite and thus publicly available. The timeline for dealing with applications in\nrespect of other information or documents will be on a case-by-case basis depending\non the circumstances, the nature of what is sought, and the judicial and clerical time\nrequired for consideration of the applications. The Court will endeavour to grant\npermitted access promptly and within 2-5 days of receipt of an application will notify\nthe applicant of the status of the application.\n71. This Practice Direction supersedes Practice Directions No. 2 of 2015, entitled\n\"Applications for Inspection of Criminal Court Files, Section 193 of the Criminal\nProcedure Code (as amended and revised)\", and (insofar as they relate to criminal\nproceedings) Practice Direction 8 of 2020 entitled, \"Public Access to Court\nProceedings by Audio or Video Links\". Nothing in this Practice Direction shall be\ntaken to affect Rule 14 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2019. Practice Direction l\nof2014 (Use of portable cameras, recording and electronic devices in court buildings)\nremains in force.\n\n10 October 2022\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 396\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm [1]\nForm for Application for Inspection or Copies of\nNon-Public Material in Youth Court and Related Criminal\nCases\n\nPractice Direction 6 of 2022\n[Paragraphs 39 & 61]\n\nPart A: To Be Completed by Applicant\n\nI    Title of the Case which is the Subject of this Application:\n\nII   Status of Applicant:\n1.  \u25a1 An Affected Young Person\n3.  \u25a1 A Legal Guardian\n2.  \u25a1 The Parent of an Affected Young Person\n4.  \u25a1Another Person \"in Loco Parentis\"\n\n5.  \u25a1 The Attorney of Record\n\nIII  Photo Identification Provided:\n       1.  \u25a1Driver's Licence:#___________________, or\n       2.  \u25a1 Passport: Country of Issue: __________________________    # __________________, or\n\n       3.  \u25a1 Other accepted identification:\n\nIV   Application for Youth Court Document\/s:\n\n     The Purpose of this Application is to\n      1.   \u25a1 Inspect, and\/or\n      2.   \u25a1 Obtain copy\/ies\n     Details of the Requested Youth Court Document\/s:\n      1.\n    ______________________________________________________________________\n      2.\n    ______________________________________________________________________\n      3.\n    ______________________________________________________________________\n\nV\nApplication for General Criminal Case Document\/s Affecting the Young Person:\nThe Purpose of this Application is to\n     1. \u25a1 Inspect, and\/or\n     2. \u25a1Obtain copy\/ies\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 397\n\nDetails of the D Summary Court or D Grand Court Document\/s Affecting the Young Person:\n    1.  ____________________________________________________________________________________\n\n    2.  ____________________________________________________________________________________\n\n    3.  ____________________________________________________________________________________\n\nPart B: To Be Completed by the*Administrative Officer & Signed by*Appropriate Judicial Officer\nI.\n*Name of Administrative Officer: ___________________________________  (*See Directions\n       6\/2022, paragraph 13)\nII.\nTitle of Administrative Officer: ____________________________________________________\nIII. I have certified that the requested document\/s fall within the categories set out in paragraph 61 of\n      Practice Direction No. 6 of 2022:  \u25a1Yes   \u25a1No\n  IV.   Date Arranged for Provision of or Viewing of Requested Documents:\n\n            ______________________________________________________________________________\n                                 (Please note that Youth Court documents cannot be emailed)\n  V. In the case of documents included in the categories set out in paragraph 61 of Practice Direction No.\n         6 of 2022, I hereby undertake to consult with the Appropriate Judicial Officer.\n\nVI.\nUpon Consultation, the *Appropriate Judicial Officer:\n           l.\nhas approved \u25a1 provision and\/or \u25a1 viewing of the following document\/s:\n\ni.   ________________________________________________________\n\nii.  ________________________________________________________\n\niii. ________________________________________________________\n\nAND\/OR\n           2. has denied \u25a1  provision and\/or \u25a1 viewing of the following document\/s:\n\ni.   ________________________________________________________\n\nii.  ________________________________________________________\n\niii. ________________________________________________________\n\n___________________________\nSignature Administrative Officer\n\n___________________________\nSignature of* Appropriate Judicial Officer (See paragraph 4, Practice Directions 6\/2022)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 398\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm [2]\nProcedures for Application for Information about a Case\n\nPractice Direction 6 of 2022\n[Paragraph 22, 24, 52 & 60]\nPart 1 For Information of Applicant\nI  Case Information Not Requiring Written Application:\n          Subject to any court direction or order to the contrary, information about case aspects listed in\nparagraphs 22, 24, 52, 57, and paragraph 60 of this Practice Direction \u2014\ni)\nmay be requested and provided by word-of-mouth, including by direction to www.Judicial.ky,\nand\nii)\nin appropriate cases, hard copies of documents may be inspected or viewed via Zoom or other\nelectronic communication, or other means deemed appropriate by the Court, on payment of\nthe prescribed fee.\n\nII   To Be Completed by Applicant\nA. Title of case subject to the above listed paragraphs: ___________________________________\n\nB. Title Date of application: _______________ C. Title Name of applicant: _____________________\n\nFor information of applicant: In appropriate cases, the application may be referred to the\nAppropriate Judicial Officer, who may decide the application at a hearing: in public; in p1ivate; or\nwithout a hearing.\n______________________________________________________________________________________\n\nFor Official Completion\nA. Prescribed fee paid: \u25a1Yes    \u25a1No.\nB. Outcome of application: \u25a1Granted     \u25a1Not Granted\nC. Reason for not granting application:\n\n_____________________________________________________________________________________\n\n _____________________________________________________________________________________\n\nPart 2 Case Information Requiring Written Application:\n\"Closed Material\" requiring written application for disclosure by means of this form is detailed in paragraphs\n9, 16, 61, 68 & 70 of this Practice Direction.\n To Be Completed by the Deputy Clerk of Court Criminal\nIn these cases, the following actions and information shall be recorded via this Form by the Deputy Clerk\nof Court (Criminal):\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 399\n\nA. Title of the case which is the subject of application for \"Closed Information\":\n______________________________________________________________________________________\n\nB. Name of applicant: __________________________________________________________________\n\nC. Status of applicant: \u25a1Party to the case \u25a1Non-Party to case, including registered member of media\n\nD. Identity and status of unregistered non-party to the case: _______________________________\n         _____________________________________________________________________________________\n\nE. Explanation as to reason case access would advance the Open Justice principle:\n______________________________________________________________________________________\n\n______________________________________________________________________________________\nF. Was the requested information referenced in court and\/or introduced into evidence:\n   \u25a1Yes \u25a1No\n\nG. Following referral to the Appropriate Judicial Officer, the application was decided \u2014\n   \u25a1at a hearing:  \u25a1in public; \u25a1in private; or \u25a1without a hearing.\n\nH. Before permission for disclosure is given in such a case, opportunity has been given to the\n     Director of Public Prosecutions and any other interested party to make representations:\n   \u25a1Yes \u25a1No\n\nI.   Upon subsequent direction by the Appropriate Judicial Officer or Court order, the Deputy Clerk\n      of Court (Criminal) may, respectively \u2014\ni)   supply the applicant with information about the case \u2014\n      \u25a1in writing; or\n      \u25a1the applicant may inspect, copy, or view via Zoom or other electronic communication,\n      or other means deemed appropriate by the Court, on payment of a *prescribed fee.\nii)  \u25a1not supply the information\nJ.   Reasons for non-disclosure: In refusing an application for disclosure the Appropriate Judicial\n    Officer shall refer to paragraph 64 and provide a brief summary of reasons for non- disclosure:\n\n__________________________________________________________________________________________\n\nK. Timeliness of response to application: Response was made \u2014\n        \u25a1within 2-5 days' of application; \u25a1within _____ days. Reason for delay:\n        ________________________________________________________________________________\n        ________________________________________________________________________________\n*Prescribed Fee Paid: \u25a1Yes   \u25a1No\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 6 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 400\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nForm [3]\nPractice Direction 6 of 2022\n[Paragraphs 24 & 65 to 70]\nApplication by Persons Affected\nPursuant to Section 193 of Criminal Procedure Code\n\nFor Copy\/ies of\nAn Order, Ruling, Judgment, Deposition, or Other Part of a\nRecord of Proceedings\n\nForm to be Submitted to the Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal)\n\nPart A: Details of Application\n\nI.   Title of the Case that Is the Subject of this Application:\n      ______________________________________________________________________________\n\nII.  Name of applicant ______________________________________________________________\n\nIII. Procedures for Consideration of Application by Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal):\n      1. Status as an \"affected person\":\n\ni)   \u25a1 has provided proof\n\nii) \u25a1 has not provided proof\n\n       2. Applicant's evidence of insufficiency of information available on register of criminal proceedings:\n\ni)  \u25a1 has provided credible evidence;\n\nii) \u25a1 has not provided credible evidence.\n\nPart B: Details of Outcome\n\nI. Upon consultation by the Deputy Clerk, the Appropriate Judicial Officer decided the application:\n\ni)  \u25a1 At a public hearing\n\nii) \u25a1 At a private hearing\n\niii)\u25a1 Without a hearing\n\nII. Representations\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 401\n\nIII. The Appropriate Judicial Officer ruled that disclosure:\n\ni)  \u25a1 is in the interest of Open Justice;\n\nii) \u25a1 is not in the interest of Open Justice.\n\niii)\u25a1 is prohibited by law.\n\nIV. Timeline\n1.\nInformation was provided to the applicant within:\n\ni)  \u25a1 2 to 5 days of.application\n\nii) \u25a1 Other:\n2.\nDelay in response due to:\n\ni)  \u25a1 Nature of request\n\nii) \u25a1 Judicial and clerical time required\n\n____________________________________________\nSignature Deputy Clerk of Court (Criminal)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 402\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE DIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\nMcKENZIE FRIENDS (CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS)\n1)\nThis Practice Direction applies to civil and family proceedings in the Grand Court\nand to Family Proceedings in the Summary Courts. It does not apply in criminal cases.\nIt is issued as guidance by the Chief Justice. It is intended to remind courts and\nlitigants of the principles set out in the case authorities and does not change the law.\nIt is issued in light of the increase in personal litigants at all levels of the civil and\nfamily courts and in conjunction with the Guide to proceedings in the Grand Court\nfor people without a legal representative, published on the same date. Both are\navailable on the Courts' website at www.judicial.ky.\nReasonable assistance from a McKenzie Friend\n2)\nThere is a presumption in favour of permitting a personal litigant to have reasonable\nassistance from a layperson, sometimes called a McKenzie Friend, a term which has\ncome to be associated with the case of McKenzie v McKenzie1. Personal litigants\nassisted by McKenzie Friends remain litigants in person. McKenzie Friends have no\nindependent right to provide assistance. They have no right to act as advocates or to\ncarry out the conduct of litigation but may attend as a friend to lend support as\nexplained below. A person who has legal training but has not been engaged as an\nattorney may serve as a McKenzie friend.2\nWhat McKenzie Friends may do\n3)\nMcKenzie Friends may:\ni)\nprovide moral support for personal litigants;\nii)\ntake notes with the permission of the judge;\niii) help with case papers;\niv) quietly give advice on any aspect of the conduct of the case which is being heard.\nWhat McKenzie Friends may not do\n4)\nMcKenzie Friends may not:\ni)\nConduct the litigation, acting as the personal litigant's agent in relation to the\nproceedings;\nii)\nManage the personal litigant's cases outside court, for example by signing court\ndocuments; or\n\n1 [1970] 3 All R. 1034 at 1336\n2 See McKenzie v McKenzie (above) a Constable v Constable [20181, Court of Appeal Bermuda, 10 October 2019.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 403\n\niii) Exercise a right of audience by addressing the court, making oral submissions\nor examining witnesses unless this has, in very exceptional circumstances, been\nauthorised by the court.\n\nIt is a criminal offence to exercise rights of audience or to conduct litigation\nunless properly qualified and authorised to do so as an attorney or as an officer\nof an incorporated entity. At present there are no statutorily prescribed\nexceptions or circumstances in which a McKenzie Friend can apply for rights\nof audience or to conduct litigation for reward on behalf of another person.\nConfidentiality\n5)\nA McKenzie Friend must observe strict confidentiality in relation to any documents\nthey have sight of and any information they hear in relation to the proceedings. Breach\nof such confidentiality will usually amount to a contempt of court, giving rise to\nsanctions including a fine and imprisonment.\nExercising the Right to Reasonable Assistance\n6)\nWhile personal litigants ordinarily have a right to receive reasonable assistance from\nMcKenzie Friends the court retains the power to refuse to permit the giving of such\nassistance. The refusal may occur on initial application or at any time during the\nhearing.\n7)\nA personal litigant may be denied the assistance of a McKenzie Friend or a particular\nMcKenzie Friend because its provision might undermine or has undermined the\nefficient administration of justice. Illustrations of circumstances where this might\narise, which are not exhaustive, are:\ni)\nthe assistance is being provided for an improper purpose;\nii)\nthe assistance is unreasonable in nature or degree;\niii) the McKenzie Friend is subject to an order such as a civil proceedings order or\na civil restraint order or has been declared to be a vexatious litigant; by a court\nin the Cayman Islands;\niv) the McKenzie Friend is using the case to promote that person\u2019s own cause or\ninterests or those of some other person, group or organisation, and not the\ninterests of the personal litigant;\nv)\nthe McKenzie Friend is directly or indirectly conducting the litigation;\nvi) the court is not satisfied that the McKenzie Friend fully understands and will\ncomply with the duty of confidentiality.\n8)\nThe following factors are NOT of themselves sufficient to justify the court refusing\nto permit a McKenzie Friend to assist a personal litigant:\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 404\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(i)\nThe case or application is simple or straightforward, or is, for instance, a\ndirections or case management hearing;\n(ii) The personal litigant appears capable of conducting the case without assistance;\n(iii) The personal litigant is unrepresented through choice;\n(iv) The other party is not represented;\n(v) The proposed McKenzie Friend belongs to an organisation that promotes a\nparticular cause;\n(vi) The proceedings are confidential and the court papers contain sensitive\ninformation relating to a family's affairs\n9)\nA personal litigant who wishes to exercise this right should inform the judge as soon\nas possible indicating the identity of the proposed McKenzie Friend. The proposed\nMcKenzie Friend should produce a short curriculum vitae or other statement setting\nout relevant experience, confirming that that personal litigant has no personal interest\nin the case and understands the McKenzie Friend's role and the duty of\nconfidentiality.\n10) The court may refuse to allow a personal litigant to exercise the right to receive\nassistance at the start of a hearing. The court may also circumscribe or remove the\nright during the course of a hearing, where the court forms the view that a McKenzie\nFriend, or a particular McKenzie Friend, may give, has given, or is giving, assistance\nthat impedes the efficient administration of justice. The court may in the first instance\nissue a firm and unequivocal warning to the personal litigant and\/or McKenzie Friend.\nIt is likely that the court may give reasons for refusal and the personal litigant, but not\nthe McKenzie Friend, has a right to appeal the decision.\n11) Where a personal litigant is receiving assistance from a McKenzie Friend in care\nproceedings, the court should consider the desirability of the McKenzie Friend's\nattendance at any joint consultations directed by the court and, if that personal litigant\nis to attend, the most effective and appropriate way in which that person should be\ninvolved in the joint consultation, bearing in mind the limits of their role, and should\ngive directions accordingly.\n\nPersonal litigants are in general permitted to communicate any information, including\nfiled evidence, relating to the proceedings to McKenzie Friends for the purpose of\nobtaining advice or assistance in relation to the proceedings. In the case of\nproceedings involving children, however, this may only be done with the permission\nof the judge to avoid contravening provisions of the Children Act. This requires an\napplication to the judge for permission and if the judge grants it then ordinarily\nconditions will be imposed giving further protection to confidentiality.\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 405\n\n12) Legal representatives of other parties should ensure that documents are served on\npersonal litigants in good time to enable them to seek assistance regarding their\ncontent from McKenzie Friends in advance of any hearing or case management\nmeeting.\nRemuneration\n13) Personal litigants can enter into lawful agreements to pay certain fees to McKenzie\nFriends for the provision of reasonable assistance in court or out of court by, for\ninstance, carrying out clerical or mechanical activities, such as photocopying\ndocuments, preparing bundles, delivering documents to opposing parties or the court.\n14) Such fees are recoverable, in principle, from the opposing party as a recoverable\ndisbursement upon taxation: Grand Court Rules Order 62 rules 19(1) and 19(2).\n\n10 October, 20223\n\n3 This Practice Direction is adopted and adapted, with thanks, from similar directions issued by the High Court of Northern\nIreland.\n\nGRAND COURT PRACTICE\nDIRECTION No. 7 OF 2022\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 406\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nPublication in consolidated form authorised by the Cabinet this 30th day of\nJanuary, 2024.\nKim Bullings\nClerk of the Cabinet\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nENDNOTES\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 407\n\nENDNOTES\nTable of Practice Directions (includes superseded\/revoked):\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n\n2022\n\n46\/2022 PD 7\/22\nMcKenzie Friends (Civil and Family\nCourts)\nCurrent\n13-Oct-22\nLG40\/2022\/s4\n13-Oct-22\n34\/2022 PD 6\/22\nPublic Access to Criminal Courts\nCurrent\n13-Oct-22\nLG40\/2022\/s3\n13-Oct-22\n38\/2022 PD 5\/22\nProcedure\nRelating\nto\nthe\nCommencement and Management of\nProceedings Under Section 7 of the\nLegal Practitioners Act (2022 Revision)\nCurrent\n31-Aug-22\nLG35\/2022\/s1\n1-Sep-22\n34\/2022 PD 4\/22\nListing of Civil Proceedings in the Civil\nDivision,\nShort\nSummonses\nand\nAssigned Judges\nCurrent\n19-Aug-22\nLG32\/2022\/s2\n19-Aug-22\n33\/2022 PD 3\/22\nJudicial Mediation Guidelines\nCurrent\n19-Aug-22\nLG32\/2022\/s1\n19-Aug-22\n16\/2022 PD 2\/22\nProcedure\nRelating\nto\nthe\nCommencement and Management of\nFinancial Services Proceedings\nCurrent\n13-Apr-22\nLG16\/2022\/s1\n14-Apr-22\n15\/2022 PD 1\/22\nListings and Custody Time Limits in\nCriminal Matters\nCurrent\n14-Apr-22\nLG16\/2022\/s1\n14-Apr-22\n\n2021\n\n91\/2021 PD 5\/14\n(Amended)\n(Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3) Rules\n2013)\nCurrent\n21-Jan-21\nGE102\/2021\/s1\n15-Dec-21\n83\/2021 PD 3\/21\nPractice Direction Exhibits in Criminal\nCases\nCurrent\n30-Nov-21\nLG68\/2021\/s1\n30-Nov-21\n44\/2021 PD 2\/21\nCourt Fees Rules (2021 Revision) (\u201cthe\nRules\u201d) GCR Order 62 Rule 3(1)\nCurrent\n7-May-21\nGE39\/2021\/s1\n7-May-21\n90\/2021 PD 1\/21\nProcedure\nRelating\nto\nthe\nCommencement and Management of\nFinancial Services Proceedings\nRevoked1\n30-Apr-21\nGE37\/2021\/s3\n30-Apr-21\n\n2020\n\n42\/2021 PD 11\/20\nElectronic Filing (E-Filing) and E-Service\nin the Grand Court of documents via\nthe Judicial Administration E-Filing\nPlatform\nCurrent\n8-Jan-20\nGE1\/2021\/s1\n6-Jan-21\n\nPD 10\/20\n1. Drawing up and Filing of Judgments\n     and Orders\n2. Form of Orders made by the Court\n    Approved as to Form and Content or\n    with the Consent of the Parties\n3. Provision of Orders of the Court by\n    the Clerk of Court\nCurrent\n2-Oct-20\nGE83\/2020\/s1\n2-Oct-20\n\nENDNOTES\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 408\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n\nPD 9\/20\nGuidance for the remote notarisation\nand attestation of documents by\nelectronic means\nCurrent\n5-May-20\nGE38\/2020\/s2\n5-May-20\n\nPD 8\/20\nPublic Access to Court Proceedings by\nAudio or Video Links During the Covid\n19 Pandemic\nSuperseded2\n5-May-20\nGE38\/2020\/s1\n5-May-20\n\nPD 7\/20\nSittings of the Court of Appeal by way\nof videoconference in response to the\nCovid Regulations, 2020\nCurrent\n14-Apr-20\nGE30\/2020\/s2\n14-Apr-20\n\nPD 6A\/20\nFSD Modifying Standard Hearing\nPractice During Pandemic\nCurrent\n8-May-20\nGE39\/2020\/s2\n8-May-20\n\nPD 6\/20\nFSD Modifying Standard Remote\nHearing Practice During Coronavirus\nPandemic\nCurrent\n14-Apr-20\nGE30\/2020\/s1\n14-Apr-20\n\nPD 5E\/20\nElectronic filing of Charges Reports\nfrom the Royal Cayman Islands Police\nServices (RCIPS)\nCurrent\n3-Jun-20\nGE45\/2020\/s2\n3-Jun-20\n\nPD 5D\/20\nElectronic Filing of Tickets from\nDepartment of Commerce and\nInvestment\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s8\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 5C\/20\nElectronic Filing of Court Reports from\nDepartment of Community\nRehabilitation\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s7\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 5B\/20\nElectronic Filing of Court Reports from\nODPP\nCurrent\n3-Jun-20\nGE45\/2020\/s1\n3-Jun-20\n\nPD 5B\/20\nElectronic Filing of Court Reports from\nODPP\nSuperseded3\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s6\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 5A\/20\nFamily Registry Electronic Filing of\nCourt Reports From DCFS\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s5\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 5\/20\nUse of Emails for Filing, Electronic\nSignatures, Court Seals and Stamps\nRevoked4\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s4\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 4\/20\nFamily Division Remote Hearings\nFamily Mention Days\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s3\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 3\/20\nFamily Division Remote Hearings\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s2\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 2\/20\nCovid 19 Guidance for the Family\nDivision\nCurrent\n9-Apr-20\nGE29\/2020\/s1\n9-Apr-20\n\nPD 1\/20\nMediation Information and\nAssessment Rules 2020\nCurrent\n8-May-20\nGE39\/2020\/s2\n8-May-20\n\n2019\n\n56\/2019 PD 4\/19\nCriminal procedure unfit to plead or\nnot guilty by reason of insanity\nCurrent\n30-Oct-19\nGE75\/2019\/s1\n\n30-Oct-19\n\n55\/2019 PD 3\/19\nProceedings in Family Division Costs\nEstimates\nCurrent\n9-Oct-19\nGE69\/2019\/s1\n\n9-Oct-19\n\n54\/2019 PD 2\/19\nAdoption of Judicial Insolvency\nNetwork Modalities For Court To Court\nCommun-ications\nCurrent\n1-Aug-19\nG17\/2019\/s1\n\n19-Aug-19\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nENDNOTES\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 409\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n53\/2019 PD 1\/19\nDirections for Proceedings brought\nunder s238 Companies Law\nCurrent\n23-Aug-19\n\nGE56\/2019\/s1\n\n23-Aug-19\n\n2018\n\n28\/2018 PD 1\/18\nCourt-to-court Communications and\ncooperation in cross-border insolvency\nand restructuring cases\nCurrent\n30-Jul-18\nG16\/2018\/s1\n\n30-Jul-18\n\n2017\n\n69\/2017 PD 4\/17\nFiling of Winding Up Petitions\nCurrent\n14-Aug-17\nG17\/2017\/s4\n14-Aug-17\n687201\n7\nPD 3\/17\nCourt Stenographer Services\nCurrent\n14-Aug-17\nG17\/2017\/s3\n14-Aug-17\n67\/2017 PD 2\/17\nRegistration of Foreign Maintenance\nOrders\nCurrent\n14-Aug-17\nG17\/2017\/s2\n14-Aug-17\n66\/2017 PD 1\/17\nPayments into Court of Trust Funds\nCurrent\n14-Aug-17\nG17\/2017\/s1\n14-Aug-17\n\n2016\n\n23\/2016 PD 2\/16\nMediation Information and\nAssessment Rules, 2016\nRevoked5\n\n14-Jun-16\nG43\/2016\/s1\n1-Jun-16\n7\/2016\nPD 1\/16\nFinancial Services Division Procedure\nRelating to the Commencement and\nManagement of Financial Services\nProceedings\nRevoked6\n15-Feb-16\nG6\/2016\/s4\n14-Mar-16\n\nPD 1\/16\nFinancial Services Division Procedure\nRelating to the Commencement and\nManagement of Financial Services\nProceedings\nSuperseded7\n15-Feb-16\nGE10\/2016\/s5\n12-Feb-16\n\n2015\n\n36\/2015 PD 6\/15\nProcedure Relating to the\nCommencement and Management of\nFinancial Services Proceedings\nRevoked8\n\n10-Aug-15\nGE60\/2015\/s5\n\n12-Aug-15\n\n35\/2015 PD 5\/15\nCayman Islands Summary Court\nCriminal Case Management\nCurrent\n1-Sep-15\nGE60\/2015\/s4\n12-Aug-15\n34\/2015 PD 4\/15\nTaking Evidence From Witnesses,\nAffiants And Deponents Who Do Not\nSpeak English\nCurrent\n12-Aug-15\nGE60\/2015\/s3\n12-Aug-15\n33\/2015 PD 3\/15\nList of Approved Real Estate\nAppraisers\nCurrent\n12-Aug-15\nGE60\/2015\/s2\n12-Aug-15\n7\/2015\nPD 2\/15\nApplications for inspection of Criminal\nCourt Files - Section 193 of the\nCriminal Procedure Code (2013\nRevision)\nSuperseded9\n  16-Mar-15\nG6\/2015\/s2   16-Mar-15\n4\/2015\nPD 1\/15\nApplications for Sealing Court Orders\nand Inspecting Court Files (Civil) (As\nAmended July 2015)\nCurrent\n\n12-Aug-15\nGE60\/2015\/s1\n12-Aug-15\n\n2014\n\nENDNOTES\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 410\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n31\/2014 PD 16\/14\nInternational Child Abduction\n(Including 1980 Hague Convention)\nCurrent\n\n30-Jun-14\nG13\/2014\/s4\n30-Jun-14\n30\/2014 PD 15\/14\nInherent Jurisdiction (Including\nWardship) Proceedings\nCurrent\n30-Jun-14\nG13\/2014\/s3\n30-Jun-14\n22\/2014 PD 14\/14\nDirect Communication with a Judge in\na Foreign Court\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s9\n14-May-14\n21\/2014 PD 13\/14\nContribution Orders\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s8\n14-May-14\n20\/2014 PD 12\/14\nArrival of Children in Grand Cayman by\nAir\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s7\n14-May-14\n19\/2014 PD 11\/14\nCourt Bundles in Family Proceedings\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s6\n14-May-14\n18\/2014 PD 10\/14\nCourt Welfare Officers Report\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s5\n14-May-14\n17\/2014 PD 9\/14\nCommittal for Contempt of Court\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s4\n14-May-14\n16\/2014 PD 8\/14\nTaking Evidence from Non-English\nSpeakers\nRevoked10\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s3\n14-May-14\n15\/2014 PD 7\/14\nRemand Proceedings by way of teleconference\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s2\n14-May-14\n14\/2014 PD 6\/14\nSummary Court Applications on\nweekends and Public Holidays\nCurrent\n14-May-14\nGE33\/2014\/s1\n14-May-14\n5\/2014\nPD 5\/14\n(Court Fees (Amendment) (No. 3)\nRules 2013)\nSuperseded1\n1\n10-Feb-14\nG3\/2014\/s1\n10-Feb-14\n4\/2014\nPD 4\/14\nOrders For Sales by Private Treaty\npursuant to Sections 75 and 77 of the\nRegistered Land Law (2004 Revision)\nCurrent\n28-Jan-14\nG2\/2014\/s4\n28-Jan-14\n3\/2014\nPD 3\/14\nJury Trials (SL 3 of 2014)\nCurrent\n28-Jan-14\nG2\/2014\/s3\n28-Jan-14\n2\/2014\nPD 2\/14\nCommunications Between Counsel\nAnd The Court Etc.\nCurrent\n28-Jan-14\nG2\/2014\/s2\n28-Jan-14\n6\/2014\nPC 1\/14\nPractice Circular - Requirement for\nStrict Compliance with Court Orders\nMade In the Family Division of the\nGrand Court\nCurrent\n10-Feb-14\nG3\/2014\/s2\n10-Feb-14\n1\/2014\nPD 1\/14\nPractice Guidance use of Portable\nCameras, Recording and Electronic\nDevices\nCurrent\n28-Jan-14\nG2\/2014\/s1\n28-Jan-14\n\n2013\n\n45\/2013 PD 4\/13\nPre-Action Protocol For Judicial Review  Current\n2-Aug-17\nGE63\/2017\/S3\n2-Aug-17\n44\/2013 PD 3\/13\nProcedure for Hearing of Winding up\nPetitions\nCurrent\n27-Sep-13\nGE78\/2013\/s2\n27-Sep-13\n43\/2013 PD 2\/13\nProcedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial\nServices Proceedings\nCurrent\n\n27-Sep-13\nGE78\/2013\/s1\n27-Sep-13\n17\/2013 PD 1\/13\nConsent Orders In Ancillary Relief\nProceedings\nCurrent\n\n1-May-13\nG8\/2013\/s1\n22-Apr-13\n\n2012\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nENDNOTES\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 411\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n90\/2012 PD 7\/12\nPayment Schedules - Authorised\nSignatories\nCurrent\n1-Dec-12\n\n49\/2012 PD 6\/12\nListing of Family Law Proceedings and\nMemo from Chief Justice\nCurrent\n8-Oct-12\nG21\/2012\/s2\n8-Oct-12\n\nPC 6\/12\nPractice Circular - Memorandum\n\n48\/2012 PD 5\/12\nApplications under the Registered\nLand Law\nCurrent\n8-Oct-12\nG21\/2012\/s1\n8-Oct-12\n15\/2012 PD 4\/12\nLimited Admission as an Attorney-atLaw\nCurrent\n26-Mar-12\nG7\/2012\/s7\n26-Mar-12\n14\/2012 PD 3\/12\nAttire for proceedings in the Grand\nCourt\nCurrent\n26-Mar-12\nG7\/2012\/s6\n26-Mar-12\n13\/2012 PD 2\/12\nProceedings in the Grand Court in\nwhich the Judge Presides from\nOverseas\nCurrent\n26-Mar-12\nG7\/2012\/s5\n26-Mar-12\n12\/2012 PD 1\/12\nDelivery of Reserved Judgments\nCurrent\n26-Mar-12\nG7\/2012\/s4\n26-Mar-12\n\n2011\n\n9\/2011\nPD 1\/11\nGuidelines Relating to the Taxation of\nCosts\n\n23-May-11\nG11\/2011\/s1\n23-May-11\n\n2010\n\n30\/2010 PD 2\/10\nSchemes of Arrangements  and\nCompromise under Section 86 of the\nCompanies Law\nCurrent\n1-Oct-10\nG20\/2010\/s2\n\n27-Sep-10\n\n29\/2010 PD 1\/10\nProcedure Relating to the Commencement and Management of Financial\nServices Proceedings\n\nRevoked12\n27-Sep-10\nG20\/2010\/s1\n27-Sep-10\n\n2008\n\n26\/2008 PD 1\/08\nRegister of Judgments Register of\nWrits\nCurrent\n8-Dec-08\nG25\/2008\/s2\n8-Dec-08\n\n2006\n\n4\/2006\nPD 2\/06\nOrders\nRevoked13\n\nPD 1\/06\nLiquidators' Renumeration\nRevoked14\n\n2004\n\n3\/2004\nPD 2\/04\nProceedings by way of Video\nConferencing Civil or Criminal\nCurrent\n\n2\/2004\nPD 1\/04\nCorrection of Judgements and\nAmended Index of Practice Directions,\nto replace the current index\nCurrent\n5-Apr-04\nG7\/2004\/s1\n5-Apr-04\n\n2003\n\nPD 2\/03\nRemuneration of Official Liquidators\nRevoked15\n\nG26\/2003\/s1\n\nENDNOTES\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 412\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n\nPD 1\/03\nOfficial Liquidators: Security for the\ndue performance of their duties\nRevoked16\n\nGE\/2009\/s2\n22-Jan-09\n\n2002\n\nPD 1\/02\nSchemes of Arrangement and Compromise under the Companies Law\nRevoked17\n\n2001\n\nPD 1\/01\nGuidelines relating to the Taxation of\nCosts\nCurrent\n1-Jun-2011\nG11\/2011\/s2\n23-May-11\n\n2000\n\nPD 1\/00\nListing Forms\nCurrent\n\nG1\/2000\/s1\n4-Jan-00\n\n1999\n\nPD 5\/99\nLegal Aid - Affidavit of Means\nCurrent\n\nG24\/1999\/s1\n22-Nov-99\n\nPD 4\/99\nIndictments\nCurrent\n\nG12\/1999\/s7\n7-Jun-99\n\nPD 3\/99\nShort Summons List\nRevoked18\n\nG5\/1999\/s9\n1-Mar-99\n\nPD 2\/99\nDrawing Up and Filing of Judgments\nand Orders\nRevoked19\n\nG4\/1999\/s9\n15-Feb-99\n\nPD 1\/99\nFiling Documents in Court\nCurrent\n\nG4\/1999\/s8\n15-Feb-99\n\n1998\n\nPD 1\/98\nShort Summons List\nRevoked20\n\n1997\n\nPD 3\/97\nConfidentiality and Publication of\nChamber's Proceedings\nCurrent\n\nG16\/2003\/s17\n11-Aug-03\n\nPD 2\/97\nRegister of Judgments and Register of\nWrits, etc.\nCurrent\n\nG10\/1997\/s5\n\n12-May-97\n\nPD 1\/97\nLegal Aid Forms\nCurrent\n\nG10\/1997\/s4\n12-May-97\n\n1996\n\nPD 3\/96\nFormal Orders in Grand Court\nRevoked21\n\nG7\/1996\/s6\n1-Apr-96\n\nPD 2\/96\nTrial Bundles\nCurrent\n\nG7\/1996\/s5\n1-Apr-96\n\nPD 1\/96\nLand Acquisition Law (Revised) \u2013\nPayment of Compensation into Court\nCurrent\n\nG2\/1996\/s11\n1-Apr-96\n\n1995\n\nPD 5\/95\nTrial Bundles\nCurrent\n22-Jan-96\nG2\/1996\/s9\n22-Jan-96\n\nPD 4\/95\nPayment Schedules \u2013 Authorised\nSignatures\nRevoked22\n22-Jan-96\nG2\/1996\/s8\n22-Jan-96\n\nPD 3\/95\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013\nMethod of Payment\nCurrent\n1-May-95\nGE9\/1995\/s10\n1-May-95\n\nPD 2\/95\nAttachment of Earnings Orders \u2013\nCalculation of Post-Judgment Interest\nCurrent\n1-May-95\nGE9\/1995\/s9\n1-May-95\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nENDNOTES\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 413\n\nSL #\nPD\/C #\nPractice Direction\/Circular\nStatus\nCommence\n-ment\nGazette\nPublication\n\nPD 1\/95\nArrangements for Listing of Chamber\nSummonses\nRevoked23\n1-May-95\nGE9\/1995\/s8\n1-May-95\n\n1 PD 1  of 2021\n\nRevoked by  PD 2  of 2022\n2 PD 8  of 2020\n\nSuperseded by PD 6 of 2022 (insofar as it relates to criminal matters)\n3 PD 5B of 2020\n\nSuperseded by republication of PD5B of 2020 in GE45\/2020\/s1\n4 PD 5  of 2020\n\nRevoked by  PD 11  of 2020\n5 PD 2  of 2016\n\nRevoked by  PD 1  of 2020\n6 PD 1  of 2016\n\nRevoked by  PD 1  of 2021\n7 PD 1 of 2016\n\nSuperseded by  republication of PD1 of 2016 in G6\/2016\/s4\n8 PD 6  of 2015\n\nRevoked by  PD 1  of 2016\n9 PD 2  of 2015\n\nSuperseded by PD 6 of 2022\n10 PD 8  of 2014\n\nRevoked by  PD 4  of 2015\n11 PD 5  of 2014\nAmended by PD 5 (Amended) (GE102\/2021\/s2) and Superseded  by  PD 2  of\n2021\n12 PD 1 of 2010\n\nRevoked by  PD 2  of 2013\n13 PD 2 of 2006\n\nRevoked by  PD 10 of 2020\n14 PD 1 of 2006\n\nRevoked by  GC (Amdt No.2)Rules 2008,R. 3(2) (GE5\/2009\/s2)\n15 PD 2 of 2003\n\nRevoked by  PD 1 of 2006\n16 PD 1 of 2003\n\nRevoked by  GC (Amdt No.2) Rules 2008, R.3(1) (GE5\/2009\/s2)\n17 PD 1 of 2002\n\nRevoked by  PD 2 of 2010\n18 PD 3 of 1999\n\nRevoked by ______\n19 PD 2 of 1999\n\nRevoked by PD 10 of 2020\n20 PD 1 of 1998\n\nRevoked by PD 3 of 1999\n21 PD 3 of 1996\n\nRevoked by  ______\n22 PD 4 of 1995\n\nRevoked by PD 7 of 2012\n23 PD 1 of 1995\n\nRevoked by PD 3 of 1999\n\nENDNOTES\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 414\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nENDNOTES\n\nc\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nPage 415\n\nENDNOTES\nGrand Court Practice Directions (2024 Consolidation)\n\nPage 416\nConsolidated as at 31st December, 2023\nc\n\n(Price: $83.20)","akn_extracted_at":"2026-06-22 15:38:30.705603+00","cms_id":"2003-0034","law_type":"subordinate","year":"2003","number":"34","title":"Grand Court Practice Directions","status":"in_force"},"provenance":{"files":[{"file_id":"5904","expr_id":"714","kind":"akn_xml","filename":"2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.akn.xml","source_url":null,"storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.akn.xml","content_md5":"b007dcd90c926301a7da41d78c2ae47a","byte_size":"651702","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-22 15:38:32.387934+00"},{"file_id":"1427","expr_id":"714","kind":"pristine_pdf","filename":"2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","source_url":"\/cms\/images\/LEGISLATION\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/pristine\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","content_md5":"9850a6e637be16a0241fdc6c708fa568","byte_size":"4263881","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-21 23:09:35.24415+00"},{"file_id":"1428","expr_id":"714","kind":"working_pdf","filename":"2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","source_url":"\/cms\/images\/LEGISLATION\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","storage_path":"\/Users\/q\/kyleg-data\/working\/SUBORDINATE\/2003\/2003-0034\/2003-0034_2024 Consolidation.pdf","content_md5":"9850a6e637be16a0241fdc6c708fa568","byte_size":"4263881","http_last_modified":null,"fetched_at":"2026-06-21 23:09:35.24415+00"}],"paragraph_count":72,"latest_history":null},"quality":{"expr_id":"714","doc_id":"714","quality_state":"needs_review","quality_score":"64","needs_human_review":"t","deterministic_categories":"{duplicate_text,page_header_footer_noise,paragraph_numbering_problem}","llm_categories":"{other}","repair_actions":"{collapse_duplicate_text,manual_review,rebuild_paragraphs,strip_page_furniture}","finding_severity_counts":"{\"low\": 2, \"medium\": 1}","finding_summary":"Sample shows mostly clean extraction but contains formatting anomalies and stray non\u2011legal text requiring review.","assessed_at":"2026-06-22 15:29:45.662683+00","updated_at":"2026-06-22 15:29:45.662683+00"}}