JAMES P RAMDHUN (Associate Member)

YEAR OF CALL: 1980 Lincoln’s Inn

Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law, Civil, Privy Council and Mental Health

Education:

  • LLB (HONS)

  • Qualified to obtain instructions directly from members of the public under the Bar Counsel’s Public Direct Access Scheme

In 2006 he was admitted to the law society as a solicitor Advocate as the main partner of Clapham Law LLP.  Mostly practicing in criminal Law and gained a legal aid franchise in mental health.  He represented overseas clients and was lead counsel in several cases at the Privy Council.

Successful Cases

The list below relates to a few of the cases that he dealt with successfully:

Privy Council History Cases of James P Ramdhun, Advocate

These cited cases among many others had unusual features and required intelligent and specialised skills to argue the merit of them successfully.

  • Mantoor Ramdhanie and Others v The State of Trinidad and Tobago P.C Appeal No. 47 of 2004 (Case heard on December 2005 Appeal No.) -
    Where 4 accused were imprisoned for life being charged with trafficking Class 1 drugs, on appeal to P.C all of them were acquitted.  The advocate accepted the brief on a no win no fee basis on behalf of two of the accused due to clients being poor persons.

  • Mitra Harracksingh v The State of Trinidad and Tobago Appeal No. 3 2004 -
    Accused claimed to have been framed by police officers, convicted and sentenced, acquitted on Appeal, a case which highlights the force, the power and influence of corrupt police.

  • Gunnersingh Ashok Kailaysur v The State of Mauritius P.C Appeal No. 23 2004 –
    A Petition to obtain leave to appeal. Accused was convicted and sentenced. Appeal to PC on the basis that the Supreme Court ought not to have increased the sentence. To avoid the substance to be heard on Petition being granted by the Privy Council, Counsel invited the Board to deal with the merit at the same time as there was no further substantial argument to be advanced at the main trial. The Board agreed and stated that although such course to be adopted for is not the rules namely to treat hearing of a Petition as a hearing of Appeal, it had the power to use the discretion and having considered the merit of the case, it allowed the appeal, a case that reflects the poor and weak judgment of the Judges.

Other Languages Spoken

French, Sylheti and Spanish.

Hobbies and Interests

Football, cycling and jogging