Orville Taylor right but ...
THE EDITOR, Sir:
I read Dr Orville Taylor's article ('UTech [clever!] sleep and mark death', Sunday Gleaner, July 23) with a great deal of interest and agreement. Until the penultimate paragraph.
Whether or not to walk away from the Privy Council (PC) in favour of a 'regional court'; and whether or not CARICOM jurisprudence should be "persuasive" or (preferably? - per Dr Taylor) "instructive" because of better local experience; and whether or not the Privy Council can make 'sound' judgments given its remoteness from our arena are all good questions to be asked in the general discussion of the fate of the PC vis-a-vis a Caribbean court of (final) appeal.
But whatever the answers, this UTech IDT case is NOT the one on which to make the argument to 'jettison' the PC (I'm ambivalent!) on that basis: "... semi-relevant British statutes (to) evaluate our judgments".
According to Dr Taylor's own counsel and admission, the PC gave exactly the right decision by upholding the IDT award. He may be correct, however, in inferring that an equally sound 'final' judgment may have been had at lower cost.