|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| September 2018 |
|
|
Applicant must show a clear personal nexus before suing individual officials for alleged human-rights violations; AG otherwise remains proper party.
* Constitutional and civil procedure – Proper defendant for official acts – Attorney General and Government Proceedings Act – whether constitutional/statutory provisions bar suits against individuals for human-rights violations.
* Human rights – Personal-capacity liability – requirement to establish a clear nexus showing individuals acted in their personal (not official) capacity.
* Preliminary objections – striking parties – when individual respondents may be struck from proceedings pending demonstration of personal nexus.
* Judicial discretion – court may later pierce the official veil and hold individuals personally liable if evidence supports personal liability.
|
28 September 2018 |
|
Refusal to release pre-entry exam scripts lawful; pre-entry examination is a valid, statutory admission criterion; application dismissed.
Administrative law; judicial review confined to decision-making process; no right to pre-entry exam scripts or marking scheme; Advocates Act authorises pre-entry examination as admission criterion; Law Development Centre wrongly joined as party; refusal to disclose scripts lawful; court will not substitute its view for statutory admissions function.
|
25 September 2018 |
|
Court permits holding of an Extraordinary General Meeting amidst quorum challenges due to shareholder's death.
Company law - Impracticability in calling company meetings - Court's power to order meetings - Change in shareholding due to shareholder death.
|
25 September 2018 |
|
Court orders provisional administration to protect Sunshine Agro Products from creditor enforcement and potential liquidation.
Insolvency Law - Provisional Administration - Appointment of Provisional Administrator - Protection of company assets and creditor interests.
|
25 September 2018 |
|
|
19 September 2018 |
|
An appeal filed without required leave was incompetent and struck out; advocate’s affidavit did not breach conduct rules.
Appeal procedure — Order 44 CPR governs appeals as of right; Order 6 r.30 CPR (strike-out) is limited to orders attacking absence of cause of action; appeals filed without required leave are incompetent. Advocates (Professional Conduct) Regulations — Regulation 9 does not bar affidavits limited to legal submissions and record facts.
|
19 September 2018 |
|
Employee continued by conduct; dismissal without statutorily required hearing/proof was unfair, award of damages and costs.
Employment law – employment by conduct and legitimate expectation of renewal – procedural safeguards before dismissal (Employment Act ss.65, 66, 68, 71) – employer's burden to prove reasons for dismissal – unfair termination – remedies: compensation, interest and costs; exemplary damages declined.
|
17 September 2018 |
|
Court orders foreign respondent to deposit security to prevent evasion and ensure satisfaction of potential judgment.
Civil procedure - attachment before judgment - necessity for security deposit in case of potential evasion by foreign respondent.
|
14 September 2018 |
|
Court ordered pre-judgment security after applicant showed reasonable cause that respondents might abscond or dissipate assets.
Civil procedure – Attachment/arrest before judgment – Section 64 Civil Procedure Act and Order 40 CPR – requirement of clear proof of risk of absconding or dissipation of assets – interlocutory security to preserve ends of justice.
|
14 September 2018 |
|
Plaint challenging judicial decision and advocates’ courtroom conduct barred by judicial and advocate immunities; plaint struck out with costs.
Judicial immunity – Article 128(4) and s.46(1) Judicature Act – acts done in exercise of judicial power; Advocate’s immunity – common-law litigation immunity and absolute privilege for statements in judicial proceedings; Pleading standard – whether plaint discloses cause of action; Civil Procedure – Order 7 r.11(d) rejection of plaint barred by law; Remedies – appeal, Judicial Service Commission, contempt, professional disciplinary bodies.
|
13 September 2018 |
|
The Town Clerk lawfully interdicted the applicant; transfer complaints were unfounded or premature and the application dismissed.
* Administrative law – Interdiction – power of Town Clerk under Public Service and Education Service Regulations; not ultra vires. * Interdiction vs suspension – interdiction is precautionary and does not attract full hearing; natural justice engaged at disciplinary stage. * Judicial review – premature intervention avoided where disciplinary process pending and no exceptional prejudice shown. * Transfers and postings – decision must be rational and in public interest; consultation requirement with school bodies held directory not mandatory.
|
13 September 2018 |
|
|
12 September 2018 |
|
Discretionary refusal to renew a fixed-term contract based on unsatisfactory appraisals is not subject to judicial review as illegitimate expectation.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Legitimate expectation – Discretionary renewal of fixed-term employment contracts – Procedural fairness – Reliance on performance appraisals and warning letters.
|
10 September 2018 |
|
Claim for ticket refunds dismissed due to inconsistent evidence and ticket terms limiting liability and requiring arbitration.
Contract formation – ticket purchase subject to terms and conditions; arbitration clause and liability exclusions; credibility of witness evidence; improper High Court venue for low-value claim; claim dismissed for failure to prove contract.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
Whether a pre‑Land Act sale was void for lack of spousal consent or vendor insanity.
Civil appeal — amendment of memorandum of appeal — leave required under Order 43 Rule 2; appeal time computation; Land law — spousal consent under s.39(1)(c)(i) Land Act non‑retrospective; capacity to contract — evidence of insanity must be contemporaneous and raised timely; evaluation of credibility and possession evidence.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
Extension of time to appeal granted where applicant promptly acted after learning of ex parte decree; appeal to be filed and fixed promptly.
Civil procedure – Extension of time to appeal – requirement of "good cause"; balancing access to justice and finality of litigation; appeals from ex parte decrees under s.67(1) Civil Procedure Act; mistakes of counsel not necessarily visited on litigant; discretion to grant extension with conditions to expedite finality.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Court granted extension to file judicial review due to advocate's inadvertent error, imposing strict filing and hearing timetable and awarding costs to respondent.
* Administrative law – judicial review – extension of time under Rule 5(1) – discretionary relief where there is "good reason".
* Civil procedure – enlargement of time – mistakes of counsel – distinction between negligence and error of judgment – when negligence should not be visited on litigant.
* Balance between access to justice and finality of administrative action – prejudice and arguability as considerations.
* Conditions may be imposed when granting extension to protect public administration.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Court quashed NAADS's decision for excluding applicants from Tea Development MoUs as illegal, unconsulted policy change.
Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Illegality and procedural impropriety - Change in government policy without consultation - Certiorari and Prohibition orders granted.
|
4 September 2018 |