Theme of the Anniversary is "Celebrating the Past, Embracing the Future" Celebrating the Past It is my distinct pleasure to rise, on behalf of the inner bar, to express felicitations to this honourable court on the occasion of this, its 50th anniversary. The Court was proudly established in 1967 by the West Indies Associated States Supreme Court Order No. 223 of 1967. It is a superior court of record for nine Member States of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States. Of those, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines are independent states and three, namely, Anguilla, the British Virgin Islands and Montserrat are British Overseas Territories. The first 3 judges of the court of appeal were Justice of Appeal P. Cecil Lewis and the legal luminaries and sons of the soil, the Hon. Chief Justice Sir Allen Lewis and Justice of Appeal Keith Gordon. All told, we have had the privilege of being led by 12 illustrious Chief Justices with our current president, Her Ladyship Dame Janice Pereira being our first female Chief Justice. I have hazy recollections of a time over 30 years ago, following my admission to the bar, when Sir Lascelles Robotham was our Chief Justice. In those days the office of the Court of Appeal comprised hardly anything more than a cubicle or two manned by the efficient Ms Dean working away tirelessly on her trusty typewriter and duplicating machine. Now the court’s head office at the Heraldine Rock Building on The Waterfront houses the Justices of Appeal’s chambers, the Court of Appeal Registry, the Judicial Education Institute, the Court of Appeal Library, and the Administrative department of the court manned by a formidable battalion of specialist staff who all perform vital services that ensure the smooth running of the court. In the old days we were served by one puisne judge. In my early days at the bar Justice Horace Mitchell was the judge assigned to St Lucia. He held court in the main courtroom back on Peynier Street, switching with ease from civil hearings to criminal assizes and back again. In those days civil proceedings were guided by the Rules of the Supreme Court which were passed in 1970. With the turn of the century came perhaps the most exciting time in the life of our court with the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules 2000, which helped us to entirely reshape the jurisprudential landscape of these islands. The court, led by Sir Dennis Byron, realized that it was imperative to ride the technological wave if the court were to truly live out the letter of its mission statement of providing access to a system of justice that is administered in a prompt, fair, efficient and effective manner. The Judicial Enforcement Management Systems (JEMS) technology, which Sir Dennis ushered in, has greatly enhanced the court’s capacity to better manage cases electronically and lessen the need to handle physical files. 1 | P a g e The court is also to be commended for introducing recording equipment into our courtrooms. This is complemented by the Liberty Notes software that allows the judge to create notes on his laptop while the proceedings are being recorded. Those notes may be easily synchronised with the court recording affording the judge the facility of instantaneously jumping from note to note and corresponding audio of the trial. All the judge need do during the trial is to record his notes into his Liberty Notes software and at the end of the day call for the court recording and, with a click or two, sync it into his Liberty Notes application on his laptop. Once synced, the judge can jump to, and listen to the audio of, any part of the trial with a click of a button. The judge’s notes of the proceedings can be as detailed or as brief as he wishes. Proper use of this technology can result in two trials being effortlessly conducted in a single day. Embracing the Future So, in a sense the future of our court is already here, but it is imperative that we all embrace it. In the last five years or so, we have endured the inconvenience and indignity of becoming a peripatetic court, unceremoniously shoved from one venue to the next as mould and other vermin infestations exposed the neglect that has been, over the decades, visited upon this, the third arm of government by the wealthier executive arm. Much has already been said about the need to build state-of-the-art Halls of Justice in our islands which would rid us of the innumerable problems plaguing our decaying infrastructure. What is going unnoticed is that the dislocation and attendant adjournments have insidiously threatened to return us to the pre-CPR days of unmanageable backlogs. Decisive action is necessary to arrest the slide. Although the technology has been with us for years, not all of our judges have made full use of it, as they should, if we are to truly make strides towards reducing the backlog. The court must push ahead, undaunted, along the path of modernity even if it means having to drag along reluctant judicial officers, kick and scream as they might. A modern court’s future is undoubtedly inextricably linked to technology. Whether we want to admit it or not, in the court, paper is the bane of our existence. How many times have our clients travelled, sometimes from overseas to attend court, only to be told that the court has misplaced the file and the matter has to be adjourned. The rest of the world is moving towards a paperless environment and if we are to be serious about increasing the efficiency of our courts we must give serious consideration to making full use of JEMS’ eFiling capabilities. We must also be prepared to consider moving on to more efficient case management systems when we outgrow JEMS. Forward-thinking courts are making more and more advances in eFiling and are now holding eTrials. For instance, in Queensland, Australia litigants may, usually at the case management conference stage, ask for an eTrial of their matter. To facilitate this, documents are converted to 2 | P a g e an electronic format and numbered as multi-page, searchable PDFs and the parties burn their trial documents to CD or DVD and deliver them to the court office. An eTrial is conducted in much the same way as a paper-based trial with the main difference being that documents are submitted and viewed electronically during the trial. This is something that we can do. When lawyers and litigants enter the precincts of the court they should be able to view real-time case status screens so they can know what cases are scheduled on that particular day, and at what times they will be heard and in which court rooms. This is particularly relevant when courtrooms are housed in different buildings to avoid catastrophes like litigants waiting at Nyrah Court for an entire day for their case to be heard while it is being heard behind their back at La Place Carenage. Modern systems have the capability to automatically send text messages to litigants reminding them of the next hearing date of their matter. Too much time is wasted because of clumsy calendaring mixups. In its ultimate form, eFiling will result in attorneys being able to share documents with the court and each other in real time in a secure environment. We have already made tremendous advances in the field of video conferencing, especially in the criminal jurisdiction of the court, where it is possible for inmates at The Bordelais Correctional Facility to be given their day in court without the state incurring the expense and wading through the security protocol associated with transporting them from Dennery. But more needs to be done. It is time that video conferencing becomes a standard resource of our courts. In the future lawyers should be able to attend court from remote locations and all, or at least certain select, open court hearings should be streamed live on the internet, as has already been embarked upon by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. We all know of the delays being experienced with the transcription of court proceedings. The court must explore the possibility of investing in voice recognition software coupled with a virtual transcription service to transcribe hearings in real time. The court must, in time, if it has not already done so, consider storing data and documents in secure private clouds with battery back-ups and stand-alone capability to guard against power and network failure. There are certainly exciting times ahead, if we are brave enough and willing to do what it takes to make ourselves sufficiently tech-savvy to embrace them. I say, “Let’s do it!” Our court has shown an amazing durability and adaptability over the years and on this, its golden jubilee, I am confident that its future looks bright as it will only continue to grow from strength to strength. In that regard I pledge, on behalf of the inner bar, our commitment to do whatever we can to ensure the continued success, relevance and viability of the court in the changing times that lie ahead. May it please the court. 3 | P a g e .