The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

SUPREME Court Justice Keith Thompson rejected Peter Nygard's application that he recuse himself from addressing a matter in which Mr Nygard was found in contempt.

Keod Smith, one of the respondents in the matter, alleged that his constitutional right to a fair hearing had been infringed, violated or threatened to be infringed or violated and that there had been the presence of bias or the possibility of bias on Justice Thompson's part towards him.

Mr Smith cited a glowing tribute Justice Thompson once wrote about the late Reginald Lobosky whose name is featured in the name of the law firm representing the applicants in this matter: Harry B Sands Lobosky & Co.

"In my judgement, the fair minded, fully informed observer having relevant facts, aware of the judicial oath and the presumption of impartiality, would come to the conclusion that it was unreasonable to suspect bias, real, apparent or perceived, on my part in this matter with the present parties on the ground that my former relationship with Dr Lobosky and Mrs Sarah Lobosky some 21 years ago would create perceived or apparent bias as against the first and second defendants in the instant matter," Justice Thompson concluded in his ruling.

Mr Smith also alleged that when he and another sought an injunction on Mr Nygard's behalf against having a provost marshal execute an order to possess Nygard Cay, he was put under intense scrutiny by the judge who showed "subconscious preference" for Fred Smith and his clients.

Justice Thompson, in his ruling, said the respondents provided no evidence of this allegation.

Justice Thompson cited an authoritative case on recusals which noted that perceived bias calls into question the integrity of judges and the judicial system therefore the usual format is for both sides to approach a judge in the privacy of their chamber and raise a matter raised in private.

"The first nor second respondent followed this procedure," Justice Thompson wrote.