Counsel Jallow was leading the plaintiff in his evidence-in-chief. She wanted the plaintiff to clarify some photographs which she had already tendered. The defence counsel all of a sudden rose and told the court that the counsel of the plaintiff was wasting the time of the court. “Your Worship, the counsel is repeating the same questions on the evidence-in-chief of the plaintiff. This is the third occasion she is still on the evidence-in-chief of the plaintiff. Litigation has an end. This is why lawyers are blamed for wasting or dragging cases. Why wasting time on these photographs?” he challenged.
This did not go down well with Counsel Jallow. She responded: “You should not tell me how to conduct my case. I am representing my client and I should guide him. I just want him to clarify some issues on the photographs. These are things which relate to them. The defence counsel should be professional. I am not wasting the time of the court. Whenever the case is adjourned, my client and I always come on time. I have to represent him 100%. You should not tell me how I conduct my case. This is very unprofessional of you.”
At this juncture, the presiding magistrate ordered for decorum in the court. “Allow her to proceed with her case,” he urged the defence counsel.
Counsel Jallow then asked the plaintiff whether he had a receipt for D35,000 which he paid to the defendant for the service on his car but he said he misplaced it. She again asked him whether he could access the receipt book at the workshop of the defendant. He answered in the negative and further stated that it was a long time.
The defence counsel then reacted: “You see, the plaintiff does not even know where the receipt is. Please, don’t waste the time of the court. There are other cases to be dealt with, and litigants are waiting. Litigation has an end.”
The magistrate intervened when Counsel Jallow reiterated that she had to take her time to guide her client. The case was subsequently adjourned to the 10th April, 2025, for cross-examination.
