[2018] CCJ 13 (AJ) regulations compelled the CEO to register him or create an entitlement or right to be registered. In its view, section 16 of the Act, headed Claims and Objections, regulates the procedure to be followed and the CEO still had to determine the claim. [35] Both the CEO and the Court of Appeal seemingly subscribe to the view, that the CEO or other registering officer has an implied discretion to determine a claim for registration even when the requirements under the Act have been met. We do not agree. The legal framework is very specific as to the procedure to be followed if the relevant officers are satisfied or dissatisfied with a claim. There is no discretion to add extra criteria to statutory criteria as stated by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal in George Rick James v Ismay Spencer and Lorna Simon where it was held unlawful to require an applicant for registration as an elector to state his occupation on the application form. [36] Section 6 of the Act states that ‘a person is entitled to vote (emphasis added) as an elector at an election in a constituency if on polling day he is qualified to be an elector for that constituency and is on that day registered in the register of electors to be used at that election in that constituency’. Section 7 provides the qualifications which allow an individual to be registered and section 8 sets out the grounds for disqualification. Once a person is qualified, section 11 requires procedural steps to be taken in order that the qualified person can become registered. An application form must be duly completed supported by a photograph of the applicant. Under section 16 the appropriate registering officer takes steps to check the details supplied in the application form to determine if the applicant is duly qualified and if so registers the applicant, or, otherwise disallows the application. In the present circumstances, however, no steps needed to be taken to determine that Professor Ventose was duly qualified as the Court of Appeal had determined that “the incontrovertible evidence is that Professor Ventrose not only satisfied the qualification requirements, but more crucially, also complied with the provisions of Cap 12 and the regulations relating to the registration of electors.”