Se­nior Coun­sel Is­rael Khan yes­ter­day won his long-stand­ing bat­tle of what is con­sid­ered as prop­er at­tire for lawyers prac­tis­ing in the mag­is­trates' court sys­tem. The rul­ing was made by Ap­peal Court judges Al­lan Men­don­ca, Pe­ter Ja­madar and Ra­jen­dra Nar­ine, af­ter hear­ing Khan's ap­peal at the Hall of Jus­tice, Port-of-Spain. Khan's ap­peal cen­tred around the no­tion that a "Nehru jack­et" was con­sid­ered by for­mer chief mag­is­trate Sher­man Mc­Ni­colls to be im­prop­er at­tire for lawyers in the mag­is­trates' courts. The suit, which is of­ten worn by po­lice of­fi­cers who at­tend court hear­ings, was made pop­u­lar by In­dia's first Prime Min­is­ter Jawa­har­lal Nehru in the 1940s.

In grant­i­ng Khan's ap­peal, the court said there was no sin­gle style or mode that was pre­scribed to lawyers who stood be­fore the mag­is­trates' courts. On Jan­u­ary 21, 2005, Khan, who was rep­re­sent­ing four po­lice of­fi­cers in a coro­ner's in­quest, was made to leave the Port-of-Spain Eighth Mag­is­trates' Court in which Mc­Ni­colls was pre­sid­ing af­ter Khan ap­peared in a Nehru suit. Mc­Ni­colls said the rea­son's for this was that such a suit did not fit the dig­ni­ty of the court and served to di­lute the con­ven­tion for lawyers ap­pear­ing be­fore the court. He gave no fur­ther rea­son­ing be­hind the de­ci­sion. The Court of Ap­peal yes­ter­day said Mc­Ni­colls' lack of rea­son­ing be­hind the de­ci­sion was ir­ra­tional.

Khan ap­pealed the de­ci­sion in the High Court in 2006, but the claim was struck out by Jus­tice Humphrey Stollmey­er who agreed with Mc­Ni­colls. The ap­peal jus­tices said Mc­Ni­colls did not con­sid­er the full range of at­tire avail­able to at­tor­neys prac­tis­ing in the courts. Tra­di­tion­al­ly a jack­et, tie and col­lar are worn by lawyers prac­tis­ing at the mag­is­trates' court lev­el, with robes be­ing re­quired for au­di­ence in the High and Ap­pel­late Courts. Khan was rep­re­sent­ed by at­tor­ney Kei­th Scot­land, and his son Daniel, while Deputy Chief State So­lic­i­tor Neil Byam ap­peared for the State. Speak­ing to re­porters af­ter the judg­ment, Khan said: "This is a vic­to­ry for In­do-Trinida­di­ans, to demon­strate that al­though they have been colonised, they have not been con­quered."

No costs were or­dered by the judges as the ac­tion was brought against a ju­di­cial of­fi­cer. Khan said that if costs had been award­ed, it would have been do­nat­ed to the Glob­al Or­gan­i­sa­tion for Peo­ple of In­di­an Ori­gin. Short­ly af­ter the de­c­la­ra­tion was made by the court, Khan re­turned to the Eighth Mag­is­trates' Court in a Nehru suit. This time, though, Deputy Chief Mag­is­trate Mark Welling­ton, did not ask him to leave but in­stead smiled and com­ple­ment­ed him on his at­tire which Khan called his "fight­ing suit."