Natasha De Silva, the mother of seven who lost two of her children in a custody battle with their father after she failed to attend a case hearing due to an apparent error by the Judiciary, can now challenge the decision by two means.
In a brief interview yesterday, attorney Alexia Romero, who practises in the Family Court, explained that De Silva could reopen her case and challenge the ruling by two methods, applying for a variation of the magistrate’s order and by appealing the decision in the Court of Appeal.
By applying for the variation, De Silva’s case will be rescheduled before Magistrate Ejenny Espinet and she would be given an opportunity to inform the court of the alleged mix-up and ask that the order be altered or removed.
Romero said that she could also opt to have the Court of Appeal review Espinet’s decision but said it would take a much longer time than applying for a variance.
Romero also stated that she recently experienced a similar situation with Family Court officials contacting her via telephone to inform her of adjournments of her client’s cases.
“In my case the court’s representative called both parties and on the adjourn date we both got, we came and explained and the court resumed the matter. It can happen,” Romero said.
However, while she said she did not want to comment on the details of De Silva’s experience, Romero suggested that the decision to make a final order in the case in her absence was unusual.
“Normally, if a person is attending court all the time and one time they did not come the court would not make an order in their absence and would adjourn the matter,” she said.
Contacted for a response to the issue, the Judiciary’s court protocol and information manager, Alicia Carter-Fisher, confirmed De Silva’s complaint.
“It was brought to our attention via the lady and we are in the process of investigating the matter. Until our investigations are complete I cannot comment any further,” Carter-Fisher said.