Appealing to the CCJ from Guyana: Routes and Deadlines

In February 2026 the Caribbean Court of Justice divided over a missed deadline. In Persaud v Persaud the majority held that a late application to bring a Guyana case before it was not beyond rescue. The Court's President would have kept the stricter rule.

The split matters because in Guyana only one court sits above the Court of Appeal. The CCJ's decision is final. The routes to it are narrow and they close quickly.

A final court since 2005

Guyana reached the CCJ by a different path from the other states that use it. It ended appeals to the Privy Council in London in the early 1970s, soon after becoming a republic in 1970. For more than 30 years its own Court of Appeal had the last word. The CCJ took over that role in 2005; section 26 of the Caribbean Court of Justice Act, Chapter 3:07, makes it "the final court of appeal for Guyana".

So the CCJ did not replace London for Guyana. It replaced the Court of Appeal at the top of the system, and no route to the Privy Council survives. Trinidad and Tobago still sends its final appeals to London. A business working in both countries can face two different final courts for the same kind of dispute.

Guyana supplies a large share of the Court's work: 8 of the 27 new appellate matters filed in 2024/25 came from there. Some carry national weight. In Gaskin v Minister of Natural Resources, decided in June 2024, the Court held that the production licence for the Liza 1 project in the Stabroek block was lawfully granted. Disputes between the oil companies themselves rarely reach it; Guyana's oil and gas contracts usually send them to international arbitration.

Three routes from the Court of Appeal

Chapter 3:07 sets out three ways to reach the CCJ from a decision of the Court of Appeal.

Appeal as of right. Section 6 gives a right of appeal in civil claims worth "one million dollars" or more and in cases of divorce or nullity of marriage. It also covers questions about the meaning of the Constitution and claims that fundamental rights were breached. Even here the appellant must apply to the Court of Appeal and name the provision that gives the right.

Leave from the Court of Appeal. Where there is no right of appeal, the Court of Appeal can grant leave: its permission for the case to go further. Section 7 allows it where a question "ought to be submitted to the Court" because of its "great general or public importance or otherwise".

Special leave from the CCJ. The CCJ itself can allow an appeal from any decision of the Court of Appeal in a civil or criminal matter (section 8). The Court confirmed in July 2016, in two Guyana criminal appeals brought by Hyles and Williams, that any dissatisfied litigant may apply to it directly. That holds whether or not the litigant had a right of appeal or was refused leave below.

Choosing the wrong route can end an appeal before it is heard. In Attorney General v Dipcon Engineering, decided in November 2017, the State appealed as of right against a refusal to extend time. The CCJ held that the dispute was "solely a procedural issue" and fell outside section 6. Special leave was the proper route. The State asked for it orally at the hearing, and the Court refused.

The 42-day clock

The CCJ's Appellate Jurisdiction Rules 2024 set the clock, and it starts on the day of judgment. Three time limits matter.

Applying to the Court of Appeal. Any application there must be made within 42 days, whether the appeal is claimed as of right or needs leave. The Court of Appeal cannot give more time.

Applying to the CCJ for special leave. The same 42 days apply. Where the Court of Appeal has refused leave, the applicant has 21 days from that refusal instead.

Filing the notice of appeal. Once the way is clear, the notice of appeal must follow within 21 days.

A late application for special leave can still be rescued by the CCJ. Until Persaud the Court treated a late filing with no request for an extension as fatal. The majority departed from those cases and held that the Court keeps the power to grant an extension itself; Anderson P dissented. A split decision is a weak basis for planning, so the safer course is to file within the 42 days.

Security, stays and hearings

Three practical questions follow once permission is in hand.

Security for costs. An appellant must put up a fund that covers the other side's legal bill if the appeal fails. The deadline is set by the Court of Appeal and cannot exceed 90 days. For Guyana the amount is capped at GY$500,000, paid as money, a bank guarantee or another approved means. It can be waived where the appellant's net worth is below GY$250,000, nobody can be found to guarantee the sum and the appeal has an arguable ground.

A stay of the judgment. An appeal does not pause the judgment on its own. When it grants leave, the Court of Appeal can allow the winner to enforce, or it can suspend enforcement until the appeal is decided (section 14). A winner allowed to enforce must give security in case the appeal succeeds.

Where the hearing happens. Hearings rarely mean a trip to Port of Spain, where the Court has its seat. The CCJ can sit in any member state or online; in 2024/25, 92.5 per cent of its sittings were virtual. Guyana's attorneys can appear before it wherever it sits, and its judgments are enforced in Guyana in the same way as judgments of the Supreme Court.

Frequently asked questions

Can a case from Guyana still go to the Privy Council? No. Guyana ended Privy Council appeals in the early 1970s, and since 2005 the Caribbean Court of Justice has been its final court of appeal. A CCJ decision cannot be appealed further.

How long do you have to appeal from Guyana to the CCJ? In most cases 42 days from the Court of Appeal's judgment. That applies whether the application goes to the Court of Appeal or to the CCJ for special leave. The Court of Appeal cannot extend it.

Does the CCJ hear Guyana appeals in Georgetown? It can. The Court may sit in any member state, but most of its hearings now take place online.

In most Guyana appeals the 42 days are not the hard part. Choosing the route is, and Dipcon shows that a wrong choice can end an appeal before its merits are heard.