Fitz Jackson refused trial-court permission to appeal bank-fee ruling

Fitz Jackson’s challenge to a cheque-encashment fee returned to the Supreme Court on an application for permission to appeal. On 6 March, the judge refused permission after concluding that the proposed grounds had no real chance of success.

The earlier proceedings had ended in summary judgment for Bank of Nova Scotia Jamaica. Jackson argued, among other things, that the bank had not formally applied for that relief. The judge held that the relevant procedural powers permitted the order in the circumstances, where the parties had agreed to litigate a fully argued legal question.

The judge also rejected the proposed challenges concerning presentment, admissions and costs. A temporary stay of the earlier costs order allowed an opportunity to seek permission from the Court of Appeal. Costs of this application were left for submissions. This ruling did not conduct a new trial of the underlying fee dispute.

Full permission judgment reviewed. Any later Court of Appeal application and the current status of the historical stay were not verified.