A major legal battle over the long-running criminal case against former CLICO Life Insurance Company chairman Leroy Parris has advanced to the appellate courts, as state representatives are pushing aggressively to reverse a lower court ruling that halted all prosecution proceedings against the ex-executive.
On Wednesday, Deputy Solicitor General Marsha Lougheed officially filed an appeal challenge with the Court of Appeal, requesting the appellate panel overturn a permanent injunction that bars the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) from moving forward with criminal charges of theft and conspiracy against Parris. The three appellants in the new challenge are Magistrate Manila Renee, the Attorney General, and the DPP, represented by Senior Counsel Roger Forde.
In court documents filed as part of the appeal, Forde laid out the state’s core legal argument: long-standing case law confirms that a DPP cannot be blocked from initiating or proceeding with criminal prosecution against any individual unless concrete evidence of bad faith (mala fides) on the prosecution’s part, or truly exceptional circumstances, can be proven. Forde emphasized that the affidavit evidence Parris submitted in earlier court proceedings fails to demonstrate either mala fides or any qualifying exceptional circumstances that would justify halting the case.
Forde further argued that the lower court judge made multiple errors of law in her original ruling. He pointed out that there was no admissible evidence to support the finding that Parris held a valid cause of action against the DPP that warranted granting the protective injunction. He also noted that no evidence was presented to back up a ruling that Parris held a constitutional right to avoid prosecution on the outstanding criminal charges, and that no legal precedent or evidence supports the conclusion that Parris is entitled to an injunction blocking the prosecution’s work.
The legal dispute traces back to last month, when High Court Justice Michelle Weekes ruled in favor of Parris’ judicial review application, quashing Magistrate Renee’s earlier decision to commit Parris to stand trial via an order of certiorari. Beyond nullifying the committal, Weekes also ordered Magistrate Renee not to share any case documents with the DPP or the Supreme Court registrar, and granted the permanent injunction that prevents the DPP from moving forward with an indictment against Parris.
The roots of the case stretch back more than a decade. In 2023, Magistrate Renee moved forward to send the case, which centers on allegations that Parris stole $3.3 million from the now-defunct insurance firm, to the High Court for trial. Parris’ legal team, led by Senior Counsel Hal Gollop and Neil Marshall, responded by filing the judicial review challenge that resulted in last month’s favorable ruling for their client, and placed Renee, the Attorney General, and the DPP as respondents in that original challenge.
Prosecutors first brought formal charges against Parris back in 2012. The multi-count indictment accuses him of stealing $3.33 million from CLICO International Life Insurance Limited between December 1, 2008 and April 27, 2009, and conspiring to defraud the company by inducing it to transfer the funds to law firm Thompson and Associates. Additional charges allege that between April 1, 2009, and March 31, 2010, Parris participated in a conspiracy to cheat the Commissioner of Inland Revenue by failing to file required tax returns and report 2009 taxable income, and that he engaged in money laundering activities involving the $3.3 million between December 2008 and April 2009.