Lawyers challenge judge in Simpson Bay Resort case

April 14, 2012 12:52 PM

PHILIPSBURG - Lawyers of Workers Institute for Organised Labour (WIFOL) challenged one of the three judges of the Court of Appeals, who was to decide Friday on the application for a stay of execution on the April 2 ruling of the Court of First Instance, which had ruled in the union's favour in its case against management of Simpson Bay Resort.

WIFOL's attorneys Maarten Le Poole and Wim van Sambeek both challenged Judge Jurjen de Haan's impartiality in this case, in which WIFOL is attempting to make Simpson Bay Resort respect the Collective Labour Agreement (CLA) for supervisors, line personnel, middle management and administrative personnel.

After the ruling was handed down on April 2 in a court case on the merits, Simpson Bay Resort lawyer Jairo Bloem said the resort would file for appeal and also submit a request for stay of execution.

The last request, which was filed to suspend the workings of the April 2 ruling, which would effectively suspend the resort's obligation to adhere to CLA obligations, was to be heard by a three-judge panel of
the Court of Appeals on Friday morning.

Attorney Le Poole stated at the start of Friday's hearing he had sent a letter and e-mail message to the Appeals Court on Wednesday to request Judge de Haan to excuse himself and resign voluntarily, but
this request went unanswered.

After presiding judge J.R. Sijmonsma had informed him the Appeals Court would only be handling the stay of execution, Le Poole immediately submitted a challenge.

The union lawyers contested Judge de Haan's impartiality, because he had also been involved in the two previous Appeal Court rulings of November 4 and 7, 2011, in this case.

It was established later that these rulings contained several "legal errors," which had been to the union's disadvantage. "All this together gives the impression of bias," said Le Poole.

Attorney Van Sambeek added that the two rulings had caused "much turmoil" within WIFOL and St. Maarten at large. "It was established that the Appeals Court had violated the principle of hearing both sides of the argument," Van Sambeek said, adding that based on these grounds, Judge's de Haan's membership of the Court would "impair judicial impartiality."

"WIFOL members felt they were tricked [by the Appeals Court's rulings] because they had previously emerged successfully from an injunction in February 2011. This led to much chagrin, and now they are again confronted with one of the judges responsible for these verdicts. Unbiased judges should be looking into this case," said Van Sambeek.

The Joint Court's vice-president formed a three-judge panel, which immediately heard the request for a challenge. The so-called Chamber of Challenges consists of three judges who have not been involved with
this case before. They will give their decision on the request on Wednesday morning, 18 April.

(The Daily Herald)

In this case Workers Institute for Organised Labour (WIFOL) is being represented by Maarten Le Poole and Wim van Sambeek of HBN Law. Simpson Bay Resort Management Company (SBRMC) is represented by attorney Jairo Bloem of Bloem & Associates.