Patterson, left, and Golding
Barbara Gayle, Staff Reporter
LAWYERS REPRESENTING Prime Minister P. J. Patterson and Bruce Golding, chairman of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and former head of the National Democratic Movement (NDM), were tight-lipped on Thursday as to whether there will be an out- of-court settlement in the libel suit which Mr. Patterson has brought against Mr. Golding.
Mr. Patterson and Mr. Golding both attended a case management conference on Thursday at the Supreme Court.
The two men had a friendly chat as they left the chambers of Mr. Justice Roy Anderson in the company of their lawyers and police personnel.
However, some lawyers raised concerns as to the reason the case, which was set for 9:00 a.m. instead of the usual 10:00 a.m. hearing, was not written on the court list which is prepared on a weekly basis.
"All the cases should be listed and those which are left off the list should be written on the court list posted on the ground floor of the Supreme Court building," said one lawyer. Another lawyer pointed out that the case was not a new matter therefore its absence from the court list could be viewed "as a dangerous precedent".
The parties appeared before the judge on Thursday for him to ascertain whether certain relevant documents such as witnesses' statements were ready.
The case first came before Mr. Justice Anderson on October 24 last year. A pre-trial review hearing was then set for July 5 this year and the trial set for October 26 and 28 this year before a judge and a special jury.
When the matter comes up at the pre-trial review hearing on July 5, the judge will make another attempt to see if there can be an out-of-court settlement.
Mr. Patterson is contending that on February 6, 2000, Mr. Golding slandered him during a speech at a political meeting at the Little London Comprehensive High School, Westmoreland. The speech was in relation to the Montego Bay street people scandal.
REPUTATION
He claims further that on February 7, he was libelled when a report of the meeting was broadcast on television. Mr. Patterson claims that he was injured in his reputation and claims further that he was disparaged in the way of his office.
In his defence, Mr. Golding has claimed qualified privilege. He stated in his defence that as leader of a political party he had a public duty to make a comment on a matter of public interest.
Attorney-at-law, Andre Earle, of the law firm Rattray Patterson Rattray, is representing Mr. Patterson. Attorney-at-law Wentworth Charles is representing Mr. Golding.
