Representation of Sheppard re Powell

On 27 February 2021, when officers of the Viscount visited Powell to issue the eviction notice, Powell raised the clameur de haro, an ancient Norman legal right, by kneeling and stating the clameur and then reciting the Lord's Prayer in French.^[5] According to law, an interim injunction was automatically in force and the officers were obliged to stop until the matter could be adjudicated.^[5] This was the first time in 21 years that a clameur de haro was raised in Jersey.^[5]

The case was heard at the Royal Court after the property owner applied to the court to have the injunction lifted. The deputy Bailiff presided over the case.^[4] The Sheppards argued that the clameur was used incorrectly as all it did was prevent the officers handing over the eviction notice. Powell responded stating that the Royal Court judgment affirming the eviction process was made without her present and using incorrect evidence.^[3] The deputy Bailiff, basing his judgment upon the last time the clameur was raised in 2000, ruled that the clameur had been raised unlawfully as the officers were acting under the order of the court which could not be challenged using this legal mechanism and accordingly fined Powell £50 for incorrect usage. He also banned her from raising the clameur in relation to this again.^[6][7]

Powell indicated she intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that her case was distinct enough to distinguish from the 2000 case and that there had been deception in the gaining of the original eviction ruling.^[6] The appeal was heard by Commissioners Sir William Bailhache, James McNeill and George Bompas. The court affirmed the judgment that this was an inappropriate use of the clameur as Powell had no legal title to the property.^[8] Commissioner Bailhache described the case as "hopeless from the outset" though he stated Powell could appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council but that she would face an "uphill battle".^[8] They also granted Sheppard's request for costs for what Sheppard's attorney argued was a "frivolous and vexatious" lawsuit.^[9]