Club row to a hearing.

The Hon. Sir James Astwood blocked the April 20 sitting of the Essential Industries Disputes Settlement Board. Instead, he gave the club the go-ahead to challenge in the courts the decision to refer the issue to the tribunal.

It marks a big setback for Labour Minister the Hon. Irving Pearman.

Yesterday the club's lawyer Mr. Alan Dunch was hopeful of completing his Supreme Court victory.

"I am hopeful I will persuade the court to my way of thinking,'' he declared.

"This is that there was not a proper reference to the board, and, therefore, it must be quashed.'' Mr. Dunch also launched a stinging attack on Mr. Pearman, accusing him of misleading the public over the controversy.

And he attacked Mr. Pearman for failing to deal with him over the row.

Next month's hearing had been fixed to settle three points: If a collective bargaining agreement was in force when the Bermuda Industrial Union asked the club to follow the grievance procedure in a row over worker Mr. Perry Goater.

If there was an agreement, did the hotel commit an unfair labour practice.

Was Mr. Goater's dismissal justified.

Mr. Dunch has argued the disputes board has already ruled on the first two points -- and, therefore, another hearing was not necessary.

He said the board found no collective agreement was in place at Grotto Bay, and no unfair labour practice was committed.

The board also ruled no agreement existed between the BIU and any Bermuda hotel after February 24, 1991, Mr. Dunch has stated.

Earlier this month Pink Beach vowed to fight Mr. Pearman's referral to the board.

Yesterday Mr. Dunch emerged victorious after appealing to Sir James.

The Chief Justice gave Mr. Dunch permission to seek judicial review over Mr.

Pearman's decision.

And he stayed any further proceedings to the board over the Pink Beach controversy.

Mr. Dunch said afterwards: "I think it's unfortunate that I was left with no alternative but to seek redress from the Supreme Court.

"It is not a question of being pleased, it's a question of being so frustrated by the Minister's refusal to deal with me and the issues that he left me with no other recourse.'' Mr. Dunch said he had written to Mr. Pearman four times between February 25 and March 10.

He received a response on March 11 which promised a "substantive reply'' following "relevant consultation''.

"On March 22 he then wrote saying the correspondence I sent him was not properly sent to the Minister,'' complained Mr. Dunch.

"It was his refusal to address the substantive concerns I was raising that left me with no choice but to seek the intervention of the courts.

"Having done so I am now optimistic that the Supreme Court will set out clearly for the avoidance of doubt what the law of the land is in so far as labour relations are concerned.'' Mr. Dunch also accused Mr. Pearman of leaving the impression he had no choice but to refer the dispute to the board.

"In fact he has an absolute discretion whether to refer a matter or not.'' Last night Mr. Pearman declined to respond to Mr. Dunch's criticism.

He said it was up to the Attorney General's chambers to take the case on his Ministry's behalf to the court.

Pink Beach manager Mr. W.A. (Toppy) Cowen was yesterday off the Island and unavailable for comment.