Barbados Lawyer Hal Gollop: Is He Unethical? Underhanded? Back-stabbing? … or Perfectly Proper?

“Among the several attorneys retained in the past on (Andrew Thomas’) behalf in a quest to claim outstanding monies owed to him is senior lawyer Hal Gollop who was Alleyne’s counsel in the recent impasse.”

… from The Nation News article Pay Up!

Attorney Hal Gollop Represented Andrew Thomas THEN Stanton Alleyne!

Will somebody please tell me how it is ethical for a lawyer to represent Andrew Thomas in a civil dispute involving the SSA and Stanton Alleyne… and then to later switch sides and represent Stanton Alleyne in the same ongoing dispute?

I thought that things like this just weren’t allowed. I thought that after representing one party in a lawsuit or potential lawsuit, that no honest or ethical lawyer could then turn around and represent a party on the other side of the same dispute?

Then again, this is Barbados – where the local legal community thinks it is OK for a lawyer to practice law after stealing over a hundred thousand dollars from a client! (Stories here and here)

Yes… Barbados where a man can be the Attorney General one day and in charge of defending and launching lawsuits on behalf of the Government… and then POOF! – all of a sudden he is the highest Judge in the land in charge of judging those same lawsuits that he launched and defended for the government! And he was never a judge before! (story here)

Yes… the Barbados legal community where the highest prosecutor in the land can misuse his power for personal gain, and where the police use a pre-signed blank search warrant to strip naked and harass a woman for the Director of Public Prosecutions and the legal community says nothing even after the documents are published online! (story here)

Maybe I’m Wrong About This…

Let’s hear from our Barbados legal community.

We’d like to know if the actions of Hal Gollop are considered ethical by other Barbados lawyers and judges.

Advertisements

50 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Crime & Law, Ethics, Political Corruption, Politics & Corruption

50 responses to “Barbados Lawyer Hal Gollop: Is He Unethical? Underhanded? Back-stabbing? … or Perfectly Proper?

  1. Justice

    What same dispute are you talking about, BFP? Gollop was Thomas’s attorney in his claim for payment against the SSA, he is Alleyne’s attorney in the claim for wrongful dismissal against the SSA. Even if he had represented the SSA in one of these matters, you would not have a point.

    *****************************

    BFP says,

    So says one of the legal elites, but what do the citizens say?

    Alleyne’s wrongful dismissal action involves Thomas as a witness and the complainant using the same dispute that Gollop represented Thomas on.

    If you can’t see a conflict of interest there… well, you must be Chief Justice Simmons!

    It is no wonder that the entire world is learning that for the most part… Barbadian lawyers operate to low standards of integrity and ethics that are not tolerated elsewhere.

  2. Justice

    Now you switch, it is no longer the SAME dispute but a that one client could be a witness in another’s dispute. Have your discussion, BFP!

    *****************

    BFP says,

    You lawyers parse the truth into little shreds until there is none left.

    You know it is unethical. You know it wouldn’t be permitted in the USA or Britain. Yet in Barbados you say “nothing wrong here, nothing to see. Move on folks”

    You are so keen to point out that no law has been broken, when it is your group that arranged the laws so “gifts” could be received by the government officials and politicians.

    Your day is done. You are a dinosaur.

  3. Sargeant

    BFP I am not a lawyer….. but if Gollop represented Thomas in his action against the SSA and from what we have been told it was Thomas’ cheques payable to Alleyne that caused his dismissal by the SSA, how can that not be a conflict of interest if Gollop is now representing Alleyne? Wouldn’t Gollop be privy to confidential information from his former client Thomas?

    BFP are you sure that Justice is a member of the Bar? Or did Justice pass by a bar at some watering hole.

  4. Michael the Sword Bearer

    Justice,

    are you suggesting that in Barbados it is ethical for a lawyer who represents a contractor in a case against a corporation for unpaid fees, to represent that corporation’s CEO (who contracted the services under dispute) in a case that involves that CEO being dismissed for alleged graft involving the same contractor… even while the former case is still outstanding?

    Maybe this is acceptable in Barbados, but it should be unethical for a lawyer to represent a client if representation of that client could adversely affect another client… unless of course the lawyer believes this is not the case AND both clients consent after consultation and with knowledge of the consequences.

  5. reality check

    “Will somebody please tell me how it is ethical for a lawyer to represent Andrew Thomas in a civil dispute involving the SSA and Stanton Alleyne… and then to later switch sides and represent Stanton Alleyne in the same ongoing dispute?”

    Its not ethical but its done all the time because the people who head the Law Society are guilty themselves all the time of failing to recognise conflicts of interest.

    Their code of ethics is the dollar bill ( any currency ).

    The oldest profession in the world is prostitution and somewhere in that equation lies the legal profession.

  6. Justice

    MTSB,

    The cases have nothing to do with each other. In the first matter, Thomas was trying to get money due to him from SSA, not Alleyne. Mr Gollop, was, but is, no longer his lawyer in that matter. In the second matter, Gollop is representing Alleyne against the same SSA in a wrongful dismissal matter.What, may I ask has one to do with the other. Are you suggesting to me that I could not sue a man for defamation because I once represented him on a theft charge? Of course not!Well this is not even close to that!

    ********************
    BFP says

    You just don’t get it, you crook!

  7. Straight talk

    JUSTICE:

    You have perfectly defined justice barbados style,

  8. Justice

    Explain yourself, ST!

  9. Straight talk

    I would, once released from moderation.

  10. Michael the Sword Bearer

    Justice,

    The cases are related. In the first matter, the Contractor IS (not was) trying to recover money from the SSA for services which were contracted by the SSA under Alleyne’s direction and authorization.

    Having represented the Contractor in this matter, the Lawyer would possess confidential information arising from the representation of his former client that might reasonably affect the new representation.

    Under the Rules of Professional Conduct that govern the legal profession in many countries, the Lawyer would be required to secure the informed consent of the Contractor, whether or not he is a current OR former client. What makes this matter even worse, is the fact that the former client’s case (for which the Lawyer was retained) is still outstanding.

  11. Justice

    I am not clear on what you are saying, Michael…you have not shown how the cases are related and there is nothing such as informed consent of the client. The fact that a lawyer was once retained by a client does not bind him to that client forever.

  12. Michael the Sword Bearer

    Relationship between cases:
    1. The Lawyer’s former client has produced cheques that both he (the former client) and the Board of SSA allege were bribes to his present client in return for favorable consideration on contracts awarded by SSA.
    2. The Lawyer has recently represented his former client in an outstanding case involving the recovery of fees for a contract awarded and authorized by his current client on behalf of SSA.

    I hope this clarifies the relationship between the two cases for you.

    Securing the “informed consent of each client” both current and former, with independent legal advice if necessary, is a common requirement in the Rules of Professional Conduct that govern the legal profession in many countries.

    Don’t the rules of conduct for lawyers in Barbados require that they obtain the consent of a former client when any new representation is related to the Lawyer’s representation of their former client?

  13. Justice

    So what has the fact that money was outstanding on a legally valid contract with the SSA, got to do with whether Alleyne is dismissed for taking a bribe from the same individual? The alleged briber happens to be the former client, but that had nothing to do with the earlier claim. I remain unaware of any informed consent of the client as to who a lawyer may represent…so long as the lawyer does not actually divulge confidential information he is free to represent anyone.

    *************

    BFP says

    Your opinion illustrates everything that is wrong with Barbadian so-called justice.

    Thanks!

  14. Michael the Sword Bearer

    LOL Justice…

    I just read your Code of Ethics (CoE) on the Barbados Bar Association website, and I understand your position now. Part IV, clause 29(1) speaks only to obtaining consent from multiple current clients, but nowhere in your CoE does it address your responsibility to former clients.

    This is a glaring omission that is addressed in the legal profession CoE of most developed countries. Does your association have any plans of updating your CoE anytime soon?

    Not that it is necessarily of significance, but I notice that the Lawyer in question is one of the five Attorneys-at-Law who drafted the current CoE (listed at the end of the document). Does he still sit on your association’s disciplinary committee?

    BFP… it would appear that Justice is correct in his assertion that, like in the case being made against the acting CEO of SSA, no rules or laws have been broken.

    “… if it is this whole charade
    depends upon rank and grade
    question for the bards
    who going to guard the guards…

    … question for the fanatics
    advocating politics
    in the face of failing standards
    who going to guard de guards”

    – Austin ‘King Austin’ Lewis

    ***************************

    BFP says

    Our point entirely… no laws are ever broken because the elites of Barbados have structured the laws and the system to allow them to profit from public office.

    But this behaviour is unethical and illegal in most civilized jurisdictions.

    As we said in a few of our recent articles – many Bajans are so oppressed that they don’t even recognise corruption… they view it as normal because that is all they have seen.

  15. Beefcake

    I have become disillusioned with lawyers over the past 10 years.

    BFP’s comments about parsing is accurate.

    Lawyers discuss technicalities, break items into irrelevant individual components, refute those componenets, and fail to look at the big picture. However, they consider themselves clever, have gargantuan egos, and are skilled in guiding debate towards their desired conclusion.

    If I recall, during the BS&T saga, one meeting was spent entirely by the lawyers discussing about how their fee structure was going to be and what they could and couldn’t include in their fees.

    The outrageous fees they charge for mortgages and property sales are disgusting. To think they take a document template, update names addresses and amounts, and then charge $5,000 – $15,000 for the work is ridiculous.

    It has been commented elsewhere in this blog that lawyers act as if they are performing a favor. They get around to the work when they feel like it, show little urgency unless there is big money involved, and then provide a generic claptrap that occasionally is wrong due to inadequate review or editing.

    While some lawyers may be ethical, and some may be hardworking, it is important for them to note that perception of their profession is more important. They can go a long way to providing a better quality and more equitable service; and they would do better to enforce standards and deal harshly with those lawyers that tarnish their professional image.

    Of course, lawyers would rather cause harm to those that dare criticise them.

    Has anyone tried suing a lawyer? It is not an easy feat, and is certainly very costly. And you are going up against a peer network, so you are disadvantaged.

    Maybe this is another reason to retain the Privy Council…

  16. bajan youth

    D) Hal Gollop is all the above and more.

  17. Block youth

    Hal Gollop is the point man for the nefarious corruption activities of the Barbados Labour Party. He played a role in Hardwood affair. They should make him leader of the Blp and remove Mottley. Of course no one will vote for Gollop but he reminds me of Harold Bovell driven by a higher calling of yard fowlism than most. Lawyers are a dime a dozen in spite of their outrageous fees yet Gollop is features in every Blp corruption case defending the indefensible. Gollop is unethical to be represent the man that SSA owes and the man accused of not paying him. We have come to expect this from Hal Gollop a Blp hack and apologist with no equal.

  18. 198.1

    BFP, MTSB, do you care to point me to a code of ethics where such behaviour would be unethical? I’m ducking out of this discussion though, it’s becoming political and that will only confuse the issue, as I see it.

  19. paul sealy

    The only thing i want to know is if Hal will be collecting this Mega6 cheque when it reaches 2Mill and returning it to Olympio like he did the last time..or will they hire another crook to do that job..what say you Hal????

  20. Anonymous

    i am taking bets that he is going to be QC and knighted in my lifetime.

    Like all the other crooks

  21. Michael the Sword Bearer

    198.1,

    Here’s a list of 62 from the US and other developed countries. Pick anyone of these at random, Google the title for the online version (for some reason the hyperlinks wouldn’t paste), and search the document for “former client”.

    I concede that no rules appear to have been broken here.

    But… your CoE does not mention responsibility to former clients anywhere in the document. You will also notice that ALL 62 CoE’s listed, are dated in the 21st century i.e. revised since 2000; your CoE was last revised 20 years ago. Perhaps it is time for a revision?

    Australia:
    Law Council of Australia
    Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory
    Law Society of New South Wales
    Law Society Northern Territory
    Law Society of South Australia
    Law Society of Western Australia

    Canada – Law Societies of Canada

    United Kingdom:
    Bar Council of Northern Ireland
    Law Society of England and Wales
    Law Society of Scotland

    United States of America:
    Alabama – Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct
    Alaska – Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct
    Arizona – Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct
    Arkansas – Revised Rules of Professional Conduct
    California – California Rules of Professional Conduct
    Colorado – Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct
    Connecticut – Official Connecticut Practice Book
    Delaware – Delaware Rules of Professional Conduct
    District of Columbia – District of Columbia revised Rules of Professional Conduct
    Florida – Florida Rules of Professional Conduct
    Georgia – Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct
    Hawaii – Hawaii Rules of Professional Conduct
    Idaho – Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct
    Illinois – Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct
    Indiana – Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct
    Iowa – Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct
    Kansas – Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct
    Kentucky – Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct
    Louisiana – Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct
    Maine – Maine Code of Professional Responsibility
    Maryland – Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct
    Massachusetts – Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct
    Michigan – Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct
    Minnesota – Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct
    Mississippi – Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct
    Missouri – Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct
    Montana – Montana Rules of Professional Conduct
    Nebraska – Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct
    Nevada – Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct
    New Hampshire – New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct
    New Jersey – New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct
    New Mexico – New Mexico Rules of Professional Conduct
    New York – New York Lawyer’s Code of Professional Responsibility
    North Carolina – North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct
    North Dakota – North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct
    Ohio – Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct
    Oklahoma – Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct
    Oregon – Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct
    Pennsylvania – Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct
    Puerto Rico – Puerto Rico Canons of Professional Ethics
    Rhode Island – Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct
    South Carolina – Rules of Professional Conduct
    South Dakota – South Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct
    Tennessee – Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
    Texas – Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
    Utah – Utah Rules of Professional Conduct
    Vermont – Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct
    Virginia – Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct
    Washington – Washington Rules of Professional Conduct
    West Virginia – Rules of Professional Conduct
    Wisconsin – Wisconsin Revised Rules of Professional Conduct
    Wyoming – Wyoming Rules of Professional Conduct

  22. BWWR

    Most countries in determining whether conflict of interest has taken place go to three authoritative sources.

    The United Kingdom case: Marks & Spencer Group plc v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Ch & CA) [2004] 1 WLR

    The Canadan case: Regina v. Neil [2002] S.C.J. No. 48.

    The American Bar Association Model Rules for Professional Conduct.

    The courts of most countries in which the rules of conflict of interest are not codified adopt those three as their standard precedents.

    If it is judged by the High Court on all the evidence that Mr. Gollop has transgressed these standards, then an action for conflict of interest would certainly be successful and the Bar Association would then have no option, but to discipline Mr. Gollop quite severely.

  23. Wishing in Vain

    Gollop is sadly a moraless person being fed by the blp, I have no idea why they continue to use him in their fight has like arthur he has gone past his best before date.

    I remember fully well in bias on a call in show before the election that was intended to be a PR campaign on behalf of the BLP where the show was hosted by Ezra Alleyne’s girlfriend also a die hard bee (she was very poor in this role anyway) the show was stacked heavily in favour of the BLP until the MP MR STEVEN LASHLEY stepped in to the phone lines and made minced meat of Gollop with one lash after the other leaving him speechless and dumbfounded.

    He is a woefully spent force and should be sent to his retirement with haste.

  24. TRUTH and JUSTICE

    I was born here in Barbados, and these things i have seen. Lawyers,Judges,Priests,Policemen,Teachers and yes the so called Politicians all of them work for the devil and that’s a fact. These people are so wicked and evil the funny thing is that they have the same thing in common they boss is (lucifer). So why are we so surprise of they actions, as the old people would say ”none can’t tell none come back” at church i was told that righteousness exalts a nation. and we all can stop the false pretending, this is no righteousness nation. this is a nation FULL of hypocrites, legal murders,legal thieves legal liers and the list goes on and on but as jah (christ) said woe unto you lawyers scribes and pharisees woe, woe, woe and unto you. who the cap fit will have to ware it.

  25. Hal Gollop

    Just a note to all you bloggers.

    Hal Gollop has been given more recognition and credit than he actually deserves. What most folks do not know (except those in the legal fraternity) is that Mr. Gollop is an attorney of ” recent vintage”. In other words, he is not backed by many years of experience. For most of his life he has been a school teacher.
    He catapulting to national fame has been through his association and unyeilding support for the past administration – Nothing to do with his ability as a lawyer.
    Now that the Govt. has changed, I expect he will become a forgotten “political lobyist”

  26. .47

    Also he is not as bright as he tries to portray.

    Hal gollop failed his law exams many times before he finally passed it.

    Like everything else with the BLP,it is not what you know but who you know at the top of the BLP party which will allow you to get big,juicy contracts.

    He certainly managed to convince VOB that the was or is an expert because he was always called upon to give his expert advice live and on air at every turn, and he did so with his usual disdain for the opposing view.

  27. anonlegal

    Just to clarify. I am not sure about all the facts surrounding this incident but I will attempt to explain the legal rule that I think BFP is alluding to.

    There is a general rule that an attorney should not represent two opposing clients in the same matter. This is a conflict of interest because the attorney may find himself in a situation where he can not properly represent the interest of one client without prejudicing the interest of another.

    For example: Jane, a land owner is seeking to sell property to John a prospective purchaser. Joe Lawyer is the attorney representing both parties. Joe finds out that the property is not really worth the price that jane wishes to sell it for because of some small defect. If he tells John about the defect he jeopardises the sale and thereby acts against the interest of jane. If he doesnt tell John about the defect he acts acts against the interest of John. Hence the conflict of interest.

    IN addition to a conflict of interest involving existing clients a problem sometimes arises where an attorney represents a client who wishes to take action against a former client (of the same attorney). E.g. Joe Lawyer represents “client A” in a matter; the Matter comes to an end; and then Joe Lawyer represents “client B” who is suing “client A” in relation to the same matter.

    IN such a case “Client” A can ask the court to stop Joe Lawyer from representing “Client B” if there is confidential information in the possession of Joe lawyer which is detrimental to Client A’s case.

    Now in this case (according to BFP), Mr Gollop represented a gentleman named Andrew Thomas in a civil matter and is now representing stanton Alleyne in the same matter.

    If Andrew Thomas and Stanton Alleyne are on opposing sides and Mr Gollop is representing both of them in the same matter, then there is a problem.

    If Mr. Gollop is representing Mr Alleyne and Mr Thomas in the same matter but they are not on opposing sides, then there is no problem.

    If Mr Gollop used to represent Mr. Thomas in relation to a matter and the matter came to an end. And is now is representing Mr Alleyne in a related matter against Mr Thomas, Mr Thomas may ask the court to stop Mr Gollop from representing Mr. Alleyne If he can show that there is confidential information in known to Mr Gollop that would be detrimental to his (Mr. Thomas’ Case).

  28. anonlegal

    The cases have nothing to do with each other. In the first matter, Thomas was trying to get money due to him from SSA, not Alleyne. Mr Gollop, was, but is, no longer his lawyer in that matter. In the second matter, Gollop is representing Alleyne against the same SSA in a wrongful dismissal matter.What, may I ask has one to do with the other. Are you suggesting to me that I could not sue a man for defamation because I once represented him on a theft charge? Of course not!Well this is not even close to that!

    —————————
    If what Justice said above is correct, then there is nothing wrong with what Mr Gollop did. The rule relating to former client conflict only applies if the two parties are opposing each other.

    *********************

    BFP says,

    Once again “Justice” parses the truth until it disappears. Although the cases would at first appear to be about different things, they all center or rely upon much of the same evidence! Obviously the Alleyne case is all about his relationship with Thomas, and the money that changed hands during the relationship and the circumstances of that relationship.

    Here’s a question… why would Gollop even go near a case where there might be a perceived conflict of interest? God knows there are enough experienced lawyers out there who have no conflict of interest.

    Once again a member of Barbados legal community just doesn’t care about ethics and how clean things look to the public. They are princes of the court who care nothing about flaunting their corruption and power.

  29. anonlegal

    Michael the sword bearer stated:

    But… your CoE does not mention responsibility to former clients anywhere in the document. You will also notice that ALL 62 CoE’s listed, are dated in the 21st century i.e. revised since 2000; your CoE was last revised 20 years ago. Perhaps it is time for a revision?

    —————————-

    Our rules in relation to ethics does not stop at the code of ethics. There are also common law rules which Barbados would have adopted from england. Our position in relation to former client conflict comes from the common law. It may not be in the code of ethics but it is still a rule here.

  30. anonlegal

    Justice stated:

    The fact that a lawyer was once retained by a client does not bind him to that client forever.

    —————

    Actually justice, you are right. After the retainer comes to and end there is no longer an attorney client/relationship and therefore there is no fiduciary duty to a former client.

    However, the attorney still has a duty to protect the confidential information of a former client. As such, a former client may ask the court for an injunction stopping the attorney from represnting a party who is seeking to take action against him in a related matter if he shows that there is confidential hat would be detrimental to his case. (see the case Jeffery Bolkiah v KPMG)

  31. Wishing In Vain

    He could not represent a flee belonging to me for fear that he would sell it out.

    He is a sad excuse of a lawyer one that is prepared to alter the truth to suit his needs at the time.

  32. Inkwell

    People who are so consumed by hatred and malice that they cannot see past them are truly poor in spirit and deserve our sympathy. It is sad when post after post after post can only spew vitriol and vituperation.

  33. Michael the Sword Bearer

    BFP,

    What has happened to the Barbados Bar Association website since I made my last post?

    Anonlegal,

    nice response… let the client take me to court if he think I did something wrong… then in court, point out that Barbados’ CoE (which by the way BWWR, is codified) does not address the issue and refer to “common law rules which Barbados would have adopted from england”…

    … even in England, whose common laws you have adopted for some of your “rules in relation to ethics”, they have incorporated the rules governing responsibility to former client in their CoE… like every other developed country in the world. But you defend not doing the same here in Barbados… I hope that when your website comes back up their is an updated CoE on it.

  34. Justice

    Yes, anonlegal, which is not the case here.

  35. ??

    WIV, thought yoy were describing yourself for a moment! Seriously though on this one I have to agree with you.

  36. anonlegal

    Michael sword Bearer said:

    “… even in England, whose common laws you have adopted for some of your “rules in relation to ethics”, they have incorporated the rules governing responsibility to former client in their CoE… like every other developed country in the world. But you defend not doing the same here in Barbados”

    ——————-

    well, I am not defending a decision not to codify the rule. I am just saying that just because something is not codified doesnt mean it does not apply in Barbados (common law is also a source of law).

  37. Hal Gollop - .47

    I have nothing against the man, but .47, you are right.
    He has (or the media) has protrayed Mr. Gollop as the Guru of Law, but this is far from the truth. His track record and sometimes erroneous mouthings on the airwaves suggest otherwise.
    Mr. Gollop is an ordinary attorney with no specialist expertise.

  38. Hants

    BFP says “Once again a member of Barbados legal community just doesn’t care about ethics and how clean things look to the public. They are princes of the court who care nothing about flaunting their corruption and power.”

    While that statement is a little “intense” there is a lot of truth to it.

    I have dealt with Lawyers in Canada and in Barbados with regards to purchasing property.

    The difference is the Canadian Lawyers treat you as a valued client and account for everything and explain the time frames to do the work.

    Real Estate is one minor aspect of my existence so I will survive the Barbados “hurry up and wait legal system.”

    I will focus on what is important and that is to make enough extra income to spend more time Fishing in Barbados.

  39. lexicon

    Wishing the insect you describe is spelt flea. You are right Gollop could not represent me for free. I would flee in other direction if this yardfowl lawyer approached me. Lawyers in Barbados are a bad bunch.

  40. Anonlegal

    Lexicon says:

    Lawyers in Barbados are a bad bunch.

    —————–

    Just out of curiosity, do you think any differently of lawyers in other jurisdictions?

    I know Lawyers are generally seen as Pariahs in society (much like politicians). It doesn’t matter where you are.

  41. Tell me Why

    Also he is not as bright as he tries to portray.

    Hal gollop failed his law exams many times before he finally passed it.
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    Abraham Lincoln tried and failed to be President of the USA before winning in 1860. So what is your point.

  42. Hants

    Anonlegal
    July 3, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    “Just out of curiosity, do you think any differently of lawyers in other jurisdictions?

    I know Lawyers are generally seen as Pariahs in society (much like politicians). It doesn’t matter where you are.”

    While this is true, people who have been treated badly by Lawyers can only report their experience.

    Lawyers in Barbados have a bad reputation because some of them are tardy in doing the work of their clients and we get frustrated.

    How is it reasonable to take years to do a Real Estate transaction on a 166 sq. mile Island?

    What we need to do is treat all matters involving money or Real Estate as a Business and micro manage the processing of Legal documents. It will cost you more but it can be done.

    There are Lawyers in Barbados that are super efficent but their Clients are Billionaires and millionaires.

    Get my drift?

  43. Anonlegal

    How is it reasonable to take years to do a Real Estate transaction on a 166 sq. mile Island?

    ———————

    I actually posted something on this a while back. Most land in Barbados is unregistered. It would probabaly take alot less time to transfer a piece of land if it was registered.

    With unregistered land a vendor’s attorney must prove to the purchaser as well as the mortgagee that all the land being transferred is actually his to transfer. He usually does this by researching the history of the property to show how the land came into his possession (this safe guards against fraud etc). The mortgagee will not generally grant a mortgage if this is not done. The vendor’s Attorney will also usually have to verify whether there are any restrictive covenants attached to the property (a restrictive covenant would prevent the purchaser from using the property in a certain way, so he would want to know this before buying the property and the mortgagee would want to know this before he grants a mortgage).

    These are just some of the things that a vendor’s attorney will have t research and provide before the property is actually sold (Even if the purchaser doesn’t care to know these things the mortgagee will not grant a mortgage without the research being done). This is the reason why conveyancing transactions take so long.

    Here is what I believe makes the delay worse. In england there are no attorneys….There are solicitors and there are barristers. Solictors handle conveyancing and other transactional work and Barristers are the ones in court arguing cases.

    In the caribbean, Attorneys can do both solicitor work and barrister work. There are Some Attorneys here who spend so much time in court (sometimes the whole day), that the neglect their conveyancing work and delay things even further. In england a solicitor doesnt appear in court and therefore does not spend the whole day in court waiting for his case to be heard.

    I could be wrong on this but I beleive that some sole practitioners who attempt to be court room advocates as well as solicitors, have trouble balancing the two. As a result conveyancing work isn’t done as speedily as it should.

    Well, I think that if more land in Barbados was registered then there would be less delay because the certificate of title will state all easemement, restrictive covenants and mortgages on the property. The certificate also serves as hard core proof that the person named on it is the owner of the property (a title deed is not hard care proof).

  44. Hants

    Anonlegal your explaination is very well written but …. you say “There are Some Attorneys here who spend so much time in court (sometimes the whole day), that they NEGLECT their conveyancing work and delay things even further.”

    Well Anonlegal I work in a completely different field and I Hants always treat my clients like Platinum and I always deliver their work on time.
    To be fair, almost everything I do has “dropdead” delivery dates so I have to complete my projects on time.

    If these Lawyers are spending too much time in court, they should spend some of the fees they collect hiring additional help or work sharing with “less busy” collegues.

    There are no excuses for inefficiency.

    Suggestion to some Barbados Lawyers. Reduce your oversized executive personal office space and give more work space to the Secretaries and clerks.

  45. Anonlegal

    Hants, I agree with you. It is a problem.

  46. Adrian Hinds

    Hal Gollop setting the record straight:

    I am now aware that the possible innuendo emanating from that report has given rise to wild and reckless speculation and even accusations in a particular medium. Therefore, in the interest of accuracy, I feel constrained to state the facts.

    http://www.nationnews.com/360660630133155.php

  47. Pingback: Guilty Gollop Digs Himself A Deeper Hole - Says He Is Not An Unethical Barbados Attorney - YOU DECIDE « Barbados Free Press

  48. Omz

    Obvious conflict of interest……in the UK you would be prohibited from acting straight up

  49. Quoting:

    “Michael the Sword Bearer
    June 29, 2008 at 8:37 pm
    Justice,

    are you suggesting that in Barbados it is ethical for a lawyer who represents a contractor in a case against a corporation for unpaid fees, to represent that corporation’s CEO (who contracted the services under dispute) in a case that involves that CEO being dismissed for alleged graft involving the same contractor… even while the former case is still outstanding?

    Maybe this is acceptable in Barbados, but it should be unethical for a lawyer to represent a client if representation of that client could adversely affect another client… unless of course the lawyer believes this is not the case AND both clients consent after consultation and with knowledge of the consequences.” / end quote:

    I have watched two lawyers here in Ohio {USA} do something very similar to this.
    Case no. 1 involved a state trooper {J} and a murder case. The attorney claimed in open court that another police officer {D} planted evidence; destroyed evidence; and framed his client {J}. 12 years later, the state of Ohio brought 4 charges against officer D. He was tried for bribery; tampering with evidence; theft in office and Obstructing justice. His attorney was the same man that had defended {J} twelve years earlier. He now claimed that client {D} was a fine upstanding police officer and person, and that the state of Ohio was wrong! He asked for a directed verdict in the middle of the trial and it was granted! The judge dismissed the jury and then dismissed all charges against client {D.}!!!

    Case No. 2: A woman filed for divorce. She informed her attorney that her husband had choked her on more than one ocassion; had raped her repeatedly during their marriage; was a peeping tom; a stalker; had molested and tried to rape her 12 year old daughter, and had made it impossible for the girl to stay with her mother; had molested his first wife’s 12 year old sister; had exposed himself to her daughter’s friends and tried to kidnap at least one of them. Skip ahead a few years, and this same man {B} was accused of raping his girlfriend’s 12 year old daughter. He got the same lawyer his former wife had in the divorce action to defend him, and the lawyer was actually sucessful in getting the prosecution to ‘drop all charges’ against her client! He walked away unscathed, and now has a video tape of 2 little black girls, on which he can be heard telling the children to ‘spread your legs way apart,’ while he is taking crotch shots of the children!!! No one is willing to do anything about this man, no matter what he does! And this IS AMERICA, not some foreign country!

  50. Pingback: The Cheques That SSA’s Stanton Alleyne Refuses To Explain | Barbados Free Press