Cherie Booth QC yesterday charged the Bank of Bermuda with ?frustrating? her client?s attempt to pursue a legal path with the Human Rights Commission in an attempt to resolve a longstanding racial discrimination complaint.

The matter came before the Court of Appeal this week but stems from a dispute dating back to the mid-1990s when Bermuda businessman Harold Darrell alleged he was discriminated against in dealings with the bank.

The matter nearly got off the ground last October when Puisne Judge Charles Etta Simmons ruled that a 2002 decision by then-Minister of Community Affairs Randy Horton to refer the discrimination complaint to a Board of Inquiry should stand.

Mr. Horton, who had responsibility for the Human Rights Commission (HRC) when he was Community Affairs Minister, had moved to appoint a Board of Inquiry on the recommendation of the HRC.

The bank appealed Ms Justice Etta Simmon?s ruling in an attempt to quash the matter being considered by a Board of Inquiry, contending it is has been treated ?unfairly? and was the ?victim? in the matter.

In 2000 Mr. Darrell first lodged a complaint with the HRC alleging racial discrimination by the bank.

The court heard yesterday that numerous developments in the more than four years since have stood in the way of any attempt by the HRC to resolve the matter between the two parties - or refer it to another avenue if that attempt broke down.

The bank argues that the matter should not even be up for possible consideration by the HRC, maintaining a 2001 dismissal of the complaint under previous Community Affairs Minister Terry Lister is final. The bank also maintained the complaint was time barred.

However, Mrs. Booth - who is the wife of British Prime Minister Tony Blair but uses her maiden name professionally - said there was evidence that a letter notifying the parties of the dismissal had been signed off by then HRC Executive Director Neville Darrell without the requisite weigh-in by the commission members.

She charged that invalidated the dismissal.

Mrs. Booth also argued that the discrimination against Mr. Darrell had not been a one-off event and was not time barred.

She argued her client - who she said was nearing the end of his patience after more than four years waiting for his human rights grievance to be considered - was clearly the one who was aggrieved by the process.

?The great unfairness that lies at the heart of this appeal lies not against the bank but against my client,? she said.

Although the matter is between the Bank of Bermuda and the Minister of Community Affairs, Mr. Darrell was represented in court as an affected party.

The bank?s counsel, James Goudie QC, said his assertion that the bank had been victimised by at least the ?appearance of bias? was tied largely to two instances of communication - one telephone call and one letter - between Mr. Darrell and Mr. Horton.

He said both knew ?full well? they should not be in contact with one another without affording the bank the same opportunity.

?There was a duty to act fairly. I submit the Minister?s reaction to Mr. Darrell?s approach was unfair to the bank.

?It was wholly unjustified ... the bank has been the victim of unfairness,? he said.

Government?s legal counsel, Jeffrey Jowell QC, told the court Mr. Horton had been right to appoint a board of inquiry to look into Mr. Darrell?s complaint against the bank and the bank?s assertion that an earlier dismissal of the HRC complaint was final could not be true.

He charged the bank with spinning out its cry of ?unfair? treatment to almost ?conspiratorial dimensions?.

Mr. Jowell contended that the limited contact between Mr. Darrell and the Minister should raise no concerns.

Mrs. Booth said it was reasonable to assume the telephone call was placed by Mr. Darrell in an effort to see where his complaint was going and that the Minister asked Mr. Darrell to put that in to writing. She said there was no evidence of any further communication.

The court heard on Monday that the communication between Mr. Darrell and Mr. Horton was not made known to the Commission before they referred the complaint back to the Minister.

Mr. Jowell said the matter, which had been ?extremely messy? so far, and had suffered numerous stops and starts, should not be stalled any longer.

"I conclude the question now is whether this should be further delayed by legal niceties or go to the Board of Inquiry,? he said, ?The matter is ripe for resolution. Indeed, over-ripe.?

Yesterday was the second and final day for the case, a matter heard by Court of Appeal President Edward Zacca, former Chief Justice and Appeal Court Judge Austin Ward and Appeal Court Judge Sir Anthony Evans.

A decision, which is expected before the end of the month, will ultimately rule if Mr. Darrell?s HRC petition can go to a board of inquiry.