 |






 |
|
PHOTO & SLIDESHOW GALLERIES
|
|
|
|






|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
| Last updated at 10:57 AM on 12/11/09 |
Judge rules he can continue to preside over case 
The Telegram
The chief justice of the trial division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador has decided he will continue to preside over two court cases involving the province’s child and youth advocate and the Speaker of the House.
Justice David Orsborn told lawyers for Neville and the House of Assembly today that he would hear the case, which Neville’s lawyer asked he be removed from.
Bern Coffey argued that Orsborn’s past comments about a related case involving Neville indicated that the judge doesn’t view the matter as important.
“Is some of this at least spinning our wheels for no purpose?” Orsborn asked in July when there was a delay in one of the cases.
“It amazes me what people can find to fight about,” he added.
In his decision today, Orsborn dismissed the application, saying the comments were made in another proceeding with different facts, legal issues and, except for Neville, different parties.
“There is no crossover of issues between the two proceedings. The comments were directed to the management of the other proceeding generally and did not go to the merits of either proceeding,” Orsborn said, adding that the comments didn’t refer to Neville.
Neville was suspended by cabinet with pay in August after she became embroiled in a series of complaints and counter-complaints, investigations and court actions. She is now going through the courts seeking the right to address the House of Assembly.
A vote in the legislature is the only mechanism that can permanently remove a child and youth advocate and she wants to defend herself if a resolution for her dismissal is tabled.
The House filed an application subsequent to Neville’s pitch to speak to the legislature. It objected to the court hearing the merits of Neville’s request before deciding if it has the jurisdiction to do so, based on parliamentary privilege.
|
12/11/09
|
Comments: |
|
This Conversation is Moderated. What is moderation?
|
| What does moderation mean? |
 |
The Telegram is committed to encouraging intelligent discourse among our readers and to creating a forum where diverse views and opinions on a wide range of topics can be aired. The forum you are in now is a result of our continuing efforts to facilitate a dynamic online conversation among our readers.
This is a moderated conversation. Once a reader follows the steps to register and submit his or her comment it goes to a moderator for the website. Once it has been approved, your comment will be displayed on the website. A comment may be edited or deleted for reasons of content or language.
All readers wishing to join a conversation must first sign in and agree to the Terms of Usage, which explain the rules of acceptable content.
|
|
|
(Post a comment)
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Howard from Newfoundland writes: Justice Orsborn should not be the one to determine if it is fitting for him to continue to hear this case. How ridiculous is our legal system getting when its arrogance precludes such decisions being made by an independent and unbiased third party? At least that way the general public would be fooled into thinking there is some transparency and reasonable process. It compares to the RNC investigating criminal matters or charges against its own members. What a joke!
|
| Posted 12/11/2009 at 12:36 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
 |
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
Not Surprised from NL writes: I am in agreement with Howard, but this does not surpriseme, it seems the members of our justice system can do what they want, they are not accountable to anyone. It is absolutely ridiculous for a judge to make a decision on whether or not he should/could oversee a case without prejiduce. Of course he is not going to say he would be prejiduce, our justice system is a joke, and it is acts like this one that makes it the joke it is.
|
| Posted 12/11/2009 at 12:58 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
 |
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
GAR from Mount Pearl, NL writes: It's nice of Justice Orsborn to discuss the matter with himself and agree with himsel that he should continue to preside over these cases. If he had disagreed with himself he likely would have overruled himself and then decide to agree with himself anyway. No doubt he listened to himself intently but didn't hear any dissenting opinions. So there you have it. Justice has been served. Move on, nothing more to be seen here.
|
| Posted 12/11/2009 at 1:32 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
 |
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
Willow from NL writes: This is funny, but it shouldn't be. Why can't this decision be made by some independent body, so much for democracy. Another case for elected and not appointed judges.
|
| Posted 12/11/2009 at 3:09 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
 |
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
NOTE
The management of this site emphasizes that it is in no way liable for persons, physical or legal, who are hosted here. Moreover, the managers of this site may not be held liable for errors and omissions that may slip into the information displayed in these reader comments. Everyone who submits a comment should read, understand and agree to the Terms of Usage for this section.
|
|
|
|
|
|