The Bank of Bermuda yesterday launched its appeal of a decision that would pave the way for a Board of Inquiry to consider charges of racial discrimination laid against it by Bermuda businessman Harold Darrell.

The appeal comes after Puisne Justice Charles Etta-Simmons ruled last October that a decision in 2002 by then Community Affairs Minister Randolph Horton to refer a racial discrimination complaint to a Board of Inquiry could stand.

While the matter is between the Bank of Bermuda (as the appellant) and the Minister of Community Affairs (as the respondent), Mr. Darrell is also being represented as an affected party.

Mr. Darrell first charged the bank with unfair treatment that was racially motivated in the mid-1990s, allegations he has said resulted in the bank launching an internal investigation that found he had been wronged.

Yesterday the court was standing room only as many from the Island?s legal fraternity and others crowded in to see top notch legal powers from the UK at work. Cherie Booth, QC, a noted human rights lawyer and wife of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, is standing for Mr. Darrell while the bank is represented by equally well-respected lawyer James Goodie, QC. Government is being represented by noted academic Professor Jeffrey Jowell, QC.

Mr. Justice Goodie took the stand yesterday, submitting to the court that there were numerous ?entirely legitimate and substantial grievances? that should have led a judge last year to rule that the Board of Inquiry should not have been appointed.

Presiding over the case is Court of Appeal President Edward Zacca and two Appeals Court Judges, Sir Anthony Evans and Austin Ward. Mr. Justice Goodie submitted that Mr. Darrell?s complaint should not have been referred to a Board of Inquiry in 2002 because the complaint was already time barred, had previously been dismissed, and ultimately should not have proceeded while other related court actions were pending. The bank maintains the complaint was beyond the two-year statutory time limit for the Human Rights Commission to consider it. More of a point was also made yesterday (than it was in the case last year) that the HRC had no jurisdiction to consider a complaint that had previously been dismissed.

A 2002 decision by the HRC to hand the case over to Minister Horton and his subsequent decision to refer the matter to a Board of Inquiry followed an initial dismissal of the complaint in 2001 by prior Community Affairs Minister Terry Lister. Legal actions between the bank and Mr. Darrell which were launched apart from the HRC complaint were also pointed to by Mr. Goodie as being a potential legal obstacle in the matter being referred to a Board of Inquiry. At least one of those actions is due to come before the court in November when separate allegations from Mr. Darrell of a confidentiality breach by the bank are to be considered. Yesterday Mr. Justice Goodie also raised questions over whether a legal stay in place should also have barred the matter from being referred to a Board of Inquiry, as well as saying there were questions over whether the Minister?s role was administrative or judicial.

Mr. Justice Goodie said whatever the determination of the Minister?s role ? whether administrative or judicial ? he should have acted fairly by exercising discretion. A key point is the bank?s allegation that Mr. Horton presented an ?appearance of bias? or ?procedural unfairness? by having direct contact with Mr. Darrell.

He said this was evidenced by a letter from Mr. Darrell to Mr. Horton referring to a prior telephone conversation about his complaint and Mr. Darrell?s subsequent hope, expressed in the letter, to meet in person on the matter. The problem arose, Mr. Justice Goodie said, because the circumstances gave one party, Mr. Darrell, the opportunity to be heard while not extending the same opportunity to the other party. ?All the bank is asking for is administrative justice,? Mr. Justice Goodie said, adding this was something that had so far been ?conspicuously denied?.

The case, which re-adjourns at 10 a.m. this morning and is due to run through the day, will see both Government?s and Mr. Darrell?s QCs take the stand.