IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED"

Transcription

1 REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND ANAND SINGH Defendant AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED Co-Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JUDITH JONES Appearances: Mr. K. Mc Quilkin instructed by Mr. R. Mungroo for the Claimant. Mr. V. Deonarine for the Defendant and the Co-Defendant. RULING 1. As a result of a collision between a motor vehicle owned by the Claimant, Prime Equipment Rentals Limited, and a motor vehicle owned by the Defendant, Anand Singh, and insured with the Co-Defendant, New India Assurance Company the driver of the Claimant s vehicle, an employee of the Claimant, died. By this action, founded in negligence, the Claimant seeks to recover from Singh damages in the sum of $196, The damages comprise expenses incurred by the Claimant to satisfy workmen s compensation payments with respect to the deceased employee ( the deceased ) in the sum of $199, The Co-Defendant is joined to the action as Page 1 of 11

2 Singh s insurers pursuant to section 10 A of the Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks) Act Singh and the Co-Defendant (collectively referred to as the Defendants ) do not deny that Singh s motor vehicle was at the time being driven by his servant or agent but deny negligence and further aver that the statement of case discloses no cause of action against them. 3. By agreement the parties determined that the following questions of law were to be answered by way of preliminary issue: 1. Whether the Claimant's case as pleaded discloses a cause of action; 2. Whether the Co-Defendant is liable under the Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third-Party Risks) Act and/or under any policy of insurance issued or at all to cover the loss allegedly incurred by the Claimant; 3. whether the Defendant owes the Claimant any duty of care in negligence and, if so, whether the damages claimed are to remote. The answers to these questions will determine the issues of law between them. 4. According to the Claimant the case as pleaded is an ordinary run of the mill running down action brought by the owner of one vehicle against the owner of another vehicle for damages suffered as a result of the negligence of its servant and/or 1 Chap. 48:51 Page 2 of 11

3 agent in the driving of its motor vehicle. 5. The Defendants submit that the Claimant s cause of action is in reality founded on an indemnity pursuant to section 15 (b) of the Workmen s Compensation Act 2 ( the Act ) rather than negligence at common law. Their short point is that the case as pleaded rests solely on the common law relief of negligence rather than a claim pursuant to the Act and that this is fatal to the claim. 6. As I understand the Defendants submission it is that since the only damage claimed is the recovery of monies expended under the Act and since this is in reality a claim pursuant to a remedy created by statute these sums are not recoverable under a common law claim in damages and can only be recovered from Singh by an action brought pursuant to section 15 of the Act. In other words the relief sought by the Claimant is not a relief available to it under a claim for damages for negligence but rather only available as a claim for indemnity under the Act. Other than insist that there is a cause of action in negligence against Singh I have not received much assistance from the Claimant in this regard. 7. The Act provides for the payment of compensation to workmen for personal injuries, including death, caused by accident arising out of and in the course of his or her employment 3. The scheme is compulsory. Compensation under the Act is calculated by reference to the type of injury; the monthly earnings of the workman and the existence of dependents. 4 2 Chap. 88:05 3 section 4 of the Act. 4 Section 5 of the Act. Page 3 of 11

4 8. Section 15 of the Act provides that: Where the injury for which compensation is payable under the Act was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability in some person other than the employer to pay damages in respect of such injury: (a) the workman may, subject to section 4(4), take proceedings both against that person to recover damages and against any person liable to pay compensation under this Act for such compensation; and (b) if the workman has recovered compensation under this Act, the person by whom the compensation was paid, and any person who has been called on to pay indemnity under section 14 shall be entitled to be indemnified by the person so liable to pay damages, and all questions as to the right to and amount of any such indemnity shall, in default of agreement, be settled by action or, by consent of the parties, by a Commissioner. 9. In this regard therefore it is clear that the section permits the employer to be indemnified with respect to money paid in workmen s compensation from the person liable to pay damages with respect to the workman s injury and to recover same by action if necessary. 10. In order to claim the indemnity provided by the Act however there must be established: (a) a legal liability in that person to pay damages with respect to the Page 4 of 11

5 injury exists; (b) that the Claimant is liable under the Act to the payment of compensation with respect to that employee and (c) that such compensation has been paid with respect to that employee. There is no doubt that the Claimant has a cause of action against the Defendant pursuant to the Act the success of which is dependent on it proving negligence on the part of the Defendant. 11. Given the stance taken by the Claimant it would seem to me that the first question to be considered is the last question posed by the parties, that is, whether the Defendant owes the Claimant any duty of care in negligence and, if so, whether the damages claimed are to remote. Unfortunately, despite the fact that the questions for my determination were framed by the parties, neither party has specifically addressed me on this question. The Defendant relies on his submission with respect to the cause of action being in reality one for an indemnity rather than negligence and the Claimant merely maintains that it has a cause of action in negligence. 12. I accept the Claimant s submission that there exists a cause of action in negligence against Singh. It cannot be disputed that, as the owner of the vehicle in which the deceased was driving, the Claimant has a cause of action against Singh in negligence and a fortiori the Co-Defendant pursuant to section 10A of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third-Party) Risks Act 5 ( the Third-Party Risks Act ) for damages incurred by it as a result of the negligence of Singh s servant and/or agent in the driving of the motor vehicle. In this regard therefore it is clear that Singh as the owner of the other vehicle owes a duty of care to the Claimant. 5 Chap.48:51 Page 5 of 11

6 13. The real question is the extent of that duty of care. As pleaded the only damage claimed by the Claimant in this case is not property damage with respect to his vehicle but rather the recovery of money paid to satisfy compensation under the Act. Does this duty of care extend to the type of damage claimed in the action or is the damage claimed too remote. In my opinion it is too remote. 14. A robust and sensible approach to this very important area of the study of remoteness will more often than not produce, I think, a instinctive feeling that the event or act being weighed in the balance is too remote to sound in damages for the plaintiff. 6 Scrutton LJ in The San Onofre put it another way: the question whether damage is sufficiently direct consequence of negligence to be recoverable, or is too remote, is rather a question of first impression Instinct, first impression or not at the end of the day this is a question of law for my determination. The question here is whether the damage complained of arose directly as a result of Singh s breach of duty in the use of the motor vehicle on a public road or as a result of the Claimant s statutory responsibility to the deceased as an employer. If the damage complained of is as a direct consequence of Singh s breach of duty then it is not too remote and therefore recoverable. If however it is as a result of an intervening cause, namely the Claimant s statutory responsibility as an employer, then it is too remote. 6 Watkins LJ in Lamb v Camden London Borough Council: [1981]QB625 at page [1922] P 243 at page 253. Page 6 of 11

7 16. While ultimately the damage suffered by the Claimant arose out of the death of his employee I am satisfied that it is not a direct consequence of the accident but rather was incurred as a result of the Claimant s responsibility as an employer to provide for the payment of compensation to workmen for injuries suffered in the course of their employment 8. The Claimant s liability for workman s compensation payments occurs not from the collision but from the statutory requirement that he pay compensation for injury to his employees. In this regard the Claimant seeks to recover money paid, not as owner of the vehicle, but in his capacity as employer. It would seem to me that the requirement that the Claimant pay compensation under the Act is an independent cause intervening between the negligence and the loss incurred by the Claimant and sought to be recovered from the Defendants. 17. If I look at the claim another way, as a claim for pure economic loss, which it is, I arrive at the same conclusion. The Claimant s claim does not arise as a natural consequence of any property loss suffered by the Claimant as a result of the accident. It does not arise from any damage caused to its motor vehicle. Nor can it be said that the Claimant as an employer or at all has any property in the deceased. The claim arises solely from the injury suffered by the deceased for which the Claimant was by statute required to provide compensation. By this claim therefore the Claimant in fact seeks not damages for property loss but rather the recovery of pecuniary losses that do not in any way touch or concern any property loss suffered by it. 18. Save in cases coming within the Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd 9 situation pure economic loss, that is pecuniary claims that are not the 8 The long title to the Act 9 [1964] A.C. 465 Page 7 of 11

8 direct or immediate consequence of physical damage, are regarded as too remote to be recoverable as damages In a case coming out of the Supreme Court of Canada 11 on similar facts as the instant case it was held that the Appellant, the Crown, could not recover money which it was made to pay to its injured servant pursuant to an act which required it to pay compensation to any employee who sustained personal injury arising out of or in the course of employment. The Crown s case, as is Claimant s here, was framed in negligence. In that case it was determined that the money sought to be recovered was not the proximate and direct result of the act of which complaint was made and was too remote to be recoverable. 20. Kerwin J. voiced this opinion: In the present case, if the plaintiff s property had suffered damage as a result of the negligence of the respondent s employees the plaintiff would undoubtedly have a good cause of action but Christian 12 was not the property of the plaintiff. The payment by the plaintiff in accordance with the Government Compensation Act is not a direct consequence of the particular interest which is affected but it too remote I agree with the reasoning of Kerwin J. In the instant case while the Claimant did suffer some property damage, namely to his vehicle, the damage 10 SCM Ltd v WJ Whittall [1971] 1QB 337 see in particular the judgment of Denning MR at pages 344 letter E to 345 letter D. 11 The King v Canadian Pacific Ry Co. [1947] SCR The injured employee 13 at page 190. Page 8 of 11

9 claimed in this action is not damage with respect to that property. The claim is purely for money expended by him as the employer of the deceased. 22. In the circumstances I am of the opinion that while there is a cause of action in negligence vested in the Claimant by virtue of the collision that cause of action is in respect to damage suffered by the Claimant in his capacity as owner of the vehicle. The action seeks the recovery of monies paid pursuant to the Claimant s responsibility under the Act. This is not in my view recoverable in an action for negligence since the expense was not incurred as a direct consequence of the negligence of Singh and is too remote. It is therefore open to me to strike out the claim 14 as disclosing no grounds for bringing an action seeking the return of money paid pursuant to a liability to pay workman s compensation. 23. In response to a question posed by me as to whether the words further and/or other relief could assist the Claimant if I determined that there was no cause of action the Defendants submit, rather ingeniously, that it is not open to the Court to apply these words to save the claim in circumstances where the Claimant does not consider that there is such a need. More fundamentally the Defendants submit that the words further and/or other relief only allow additional relief of the same type as claimed to be granted. A claim for an indemnity under the Act is not the same type of relief as a claim for damages for negligence. In any event, they submit, relief under the Act is not supported by the case as pleaded. Simply put no facts have been pleaded to prove (b) above. Nor has the Claimant placed before the Court any facts relevant to the computation of the workmen s compensation if payable. 14 The definition of statement of case in the Part 2 of the CPR includes a claim Page 9 of 11

10 24. I accept that latter submission. It accords with the statement of the law made after a review of the relevant authorities by Neuberger J in Kirin-Amgen v Transkaryotic Therapies (No 3): In summary it appears to me that where there is a claim for further or other relief, then, unless the claimant obtains permission to amend a particulars of claim to broaden the relief claimed, the position is as follows. Firstly, relief would not normally be accorded in respect to a claim of a type which is not pleaded. Secondly, relief will not be accorded which is inconsistent with the relief specifically claimed, but that does not, of course, preclude alternative relief being granted, for instance, damages or declaration in lieu of an injunction, or damages in lieu of specific performance. Thirdly, relief will not be granted if not supported by the allegations in the pleaded case. Fourthly, relief will not be accorded, save in very unusual circumstances, if the defendant reasonably claims that the claim for it takes him by surprise For the purpose of the arguments before me I have not treated with the claim for investigation fees. The statement of case does not particularise to what investigation these fees relate. As pleaded they can be considered pure economic loss. In any event a claim for $3, has no place in the High Court. 26. Since in my opinion there is no valid claim before it would seem to me that in these circumstances there is no need for me to treat with the other questions 15 [2002]IP&T 331 at 339 g-j. Page 10 of 11

11 posed for my determination. However it would seem to me that since the answers to the questions posed follow from the positions taken by me for completeness I propose to briefly answer these questions. I am satisfied that the Claimant s case as pleaded does not disclose a cause of action which would entitle him to the relief sought. 27. Similarly the simple answer to the question whether the Co-Defendant is liable under the Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third-Party Risks) Act and/or under any policy of insurance issued or at all to cover the loss allegedly incurred by the Claimant is no. The loss incurred by the Claimant is not as a result of the damage to his property caused or arising out of the use of Singh s motor vehicle but rather it is loss caused by virtue of the employment of the deceased by the Claimant. This therefore is not a loss required to be covered by Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third- Party Risks) Act. 28. Accordingly all three questions are answered in favor of the Defendants. Dated this 20 th day of May, Judith Jones Judge Page 11 of 11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MOHANLAL RAMCHARAN AND CARLYLE AMBROSE SERRANO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MOHANLAL RAMCHARAN AND CARLYLE AMBROSE SERRANO REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2011-02646 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MOHANLAL RAMCHARAN AND Claimant CARLYLE AMBROSE SERRANO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JUDITH JONES Appearances:

More information

IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT CHAPTER 88:05

IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT CHAPTER 88:05 REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT CHAPTER 88:05 WC105 of 2009 Application for Compensation by Dependants (1)Rhonda Glasgow- Caldiera for herself and on behalf

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between STEPHEN LORENZO LODAI. And NAGICO INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. (formerly known as GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between STEPHEN LORENZO LODAI. And NAGICO INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. (formerly known as GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED) THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. C.V. 2014-01715 Between STEPHEN LORENZO LODAI Claimant And NAGICO INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (formerly known as GTM INSURANCE COMPANY

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between KERRON MOE. And GARY HARPER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between KERRON MOE. And GARY HARPER THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No CV 2012-03569 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between KERRON MOE And Claimant GARY HARPER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER A. RAJKUMAR APPEARANCES Mr. St.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. LAING SANDBLASTING & PAINTING CO. LTD. Claimant AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. LAING SANDBLASTING & PAINTING CO. LTD. Claimant AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2012-00691 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LAING SANDBLASTING & PAINTING CO. LTD. Claimant AND DOC S ENGINEERING WORKS LTD Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE

More information

Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL

Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Hubley v. Hubley Estate 2011 PECA 19 Date: 20111124 Docket: S1-CA-1211 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND: DENISE

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 BEFORE: R. McCutcheon: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 28, 2015 at Toronto Oral hearing Post-hearing activity completed on September 10, 2015

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. WC 45 of Seeram Roopnarine 1½ Mile Mark, Penal Rock Road #8 Rampersad Drive, Penal.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. WC 45 of Seeram Roopnarine 1½ Mile Mark, Penal Rock Road #8 Rampersad Drive, Penal. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO WC 45 of 2010 Seeram Roopnarine 1½ Mile Mark, Penal Rock Road #8 Rampersad Drive, Penal And Raffic Mohammed & Kassie Roopnarine ***********************

More information

THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2017-02046 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO RAPHAEL MOHAMMED AND THE COMMISSIONER OF PRISONS CLAIMANT FIRST DEFENDANT AND THE ATTORNEY

More information

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND SAINT LUCIA THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. 0583/1998 BETWEEN BERTHA FRANCIS Claimant AND FIRST CARIBBEAN INTERNATIONAL BANK (B DOS) LTD. formerly CIBC Caribbean

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. PAN AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED Defendant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. PAN AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED Defendant THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2015-003645 BETWEEN MAHARAJ 2002 LIMITED Claimant AND PAN AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED Defendant

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LENNOX OFFSHORE SERVICES LIMITED AND DECISION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LENNOX OFFSHORE SERVICES LIMITED AND DECISION REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO: CV2010-00536 BETWEEN LENNOX OFFSHORE SERVICES LIMITED AND CLAIMANT HALIBURTON TRINIDAD LIMITED DEFENDANT DECISION Before the Honourable

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN DOC S ENGINEERING WORKS (1992) LTD DOCS ENGINEERING WORKS LTD RAJ GOSINE SHAMDEO GOSINE AND

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN DOC S ENGINEERING WORKS (1992) LTD DOCS ENGINEERING WORKS LTD RAJ GOSINE SHAMDEO GOSINE AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CA No. 34 of 2013 CV No. 03690 of 2011 PANEL: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN DOC S ENGINEERING WORKS (1992) LTD DOCS ENGINEERING WORKS LTD RAJ GOSINE SHAMDEO GOSINE AND

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND TECU CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND TECU CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2010-01135 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN ERNEST TROTMAN CAMILLE RICHARDS TROTMAN Claimants AND TECU CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ************************************************

More information

Smt. Yallwwa & Ors vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 16 May, 2007

Smt. Yallwwa & Ors vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 16 May, 2007 Supreme Court of India Smt. Yallwwa & Ors vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 16 May, 2007 Author: S.B. Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, Markandey Katju CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2674 of 2007 PETITIONER: Smt.

More information

CROWN PROCEEDINGS ACT

CROWN PROCEEDINGS ACT c t CROWN PROCEEDINGS ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to December 20, 2017. It is intended for information and

More information

MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge

MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge IN THE COUNTY COURT AT BRIGHTON CLAIM NO: D60YJ743 Brighton County and Family Court William Street Brighton BN2 0RF BEFORE HER HONOUR JUDGE VENN BETWEEN MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING Claimant and MR MARK MCDONNELL

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 194/16

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 194/16 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 194/16 BEFORE: S. Martel: Vice-Chair HEARING: January 21, 2016 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: March 23, 2016 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2016 ONWSIAT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MORTGAGE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED Claimant AND STEPHEN ROBERTS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MORTGAGE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED Claimant AND STEPHEN ROBERTS IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2010-00448/HCA S-2360 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MORTGAGE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED Claimant AND STEPHEN ROBERTS ELIZABETH ROBERTS

More information

KEY ASPECTS OF THE LAW OF CONTRACT

KEY ASPECTS OF THE LAW OF CONTRACT This article is relevant to Paper F4 (ENG) Together, contract and the tort of negligence form syllabus area B of the Paper F4 (ENG) syllabus: the law of obligations. As this indicates, the areas have a

More information

CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS

CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS Cap.107] CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS Act No. 12 of 1968. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW RELATING TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT

More information

NC General Statutes - Chapter 1A Article 8 1

NC General Statutes - Chapter 1A Article 8 1 Article 8. Miscellaneous. Rule 64. Seizure of person or property. At the commencement of and during the course of an action, all remedies providing for seizure of person or property for the purpose of

More information

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03 JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place

More information

REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV# 2009-01502 BETWEEN IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF TILKEY GOBIN ALSO CALLED TILKIE GOBIN DECEASED HERAWATI CHARLES CLAIMANT And (1) MONICA JANKEY MADHOSINGH (as Executrix

More information

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACT

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACT SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACT CHAPTER 4:01 Act 12 of 1962 Amended by 14 of 1964 29 of 1968 2 of 1972 19 of 1973 2 of 1974 39 of 1975 6 of 1976 29 of 1976 50 of 1976 136/1976 22 of 1977 6 of 1978 3 of

More information

(3;)c\~~,i.Ji_..,~ DATE ~ - ;... <'

(3;)c\~~,i.Ji_..,~ DATE ~ - ;... <' CASE N0:768/2013 DELETE WHJCHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: vpo (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: y(ino (3;)c\~~,i.Ji_..,~ DATE ~ - ;....

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND AND THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-01420 BETWEEN RICKY PANDOHEE CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND THE PRESIDENT,

More information

THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BILL, Arrangement of Clauses PART I PRELIMINARY PART II

THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BILL, Arrangement of Clauses PART I PRELIMINARY PART II THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BILL, 1999 Arrangement of Clauses PART I PRELIMINARY Clause: 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Interpretation 4. Application of Act PART II ESTABLISHMENT, COMPOSITION

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-00756 BETWEEN CANDICE MAHADEO Claimant AND GEISHA MAHADEO NIRMAL MAHADEO Defendants Before the Honourable Madam Justice Margaret

More information

Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL. JOHN McGOWAN and CAROLYN McGOWAN THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA

Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL. JOHN McGOWAN and CAROLYN McGOWAN THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL Citation: McGowan v. Bank of Nova Scotia 2011 PECA 20 Date: 20111214 Docket: S1-CA-1202 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND:

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2013-004233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT CHAPTER 35:01 AND

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN. And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN. And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT) REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2008-01684 BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN CLAIMANT And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT) THE SEAMEN AND WATERFRONT WORKER S TRADE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando. VSN INVESTMENTS LIMITED Claimant AND. SEASONS LIMITED (In Receivership)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando. VSN INVESTMENTS LIMITED Claimant AND. SEASONS LIMITED (In Receivership) REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando CV. NO. 2006-01349 BETWEEN VSN INVESTMENTS LIMITED Claimant AND SEASONS LIMITED (In Receivership) Defendant BEFORE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF EASTERN CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1995 BETWEEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF EASTERN CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1995 BETWEEN REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2015-04009 IN THE MATTER OF EASTERN CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1995 BETWEEN

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PORT OF SPAIN BETWEEN CHANDRAGUPTA MAHARAJ MAIANTEE MAHARAJ AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PORT OF SPAIN BETWEEN CHANDRAGUPTA MAHARAJ MAIANTEE MAHARAJ AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. Cv.2011-00647 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PORT OF SPAIN BETWEEN CHANDRAGUPTA MAHARAJ MAIANTEE MAHARAJ AND Claimants NIGEL STELLA JOSEPH GENTLE Defendants BEFORE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECOVERY OF DAMAGES. C.R.P. No.365/2006 RESERVED ON : DATE OF DECISION:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECOVERY OF DAMAGES. C.R.P. No.365/2006 RESERVED ON : DATE OF DECISION: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECOVERY OF DAMAGES C.R.P. No.365/2006 RESERVED ON : 27-02-2007 DATE OF DECISION: 05-03-2007 TRISTAR CONSULTANTS... Petitioner through: Mr.M.S.Ganesh,

More information

BERMUDA WORKMEN S COMPENSATION RULES OF COURT 1965 SR&O 14 / 1966

BERMUDA WORKMEN S COMPENSATION RULES OF COURT 1965 SR&O 14 / 1966 QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA WORKMEN S COMPENSATION RULES OF COURT 1965 SR&O 14 / 1966 [made under section 41 of the Workmen s Compensation Act 1965 brought into operation on 2 August 1965] TABLE OF

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2015 01715 Floyd Homer BETWEEN Lawrence John Claimants AND Stanley Dipsingh Commissioner of State Lands Ian Fletcher First

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN VICARDO GONSALVES CLAIMANT AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN VICARDO GONSALVES CLAIMANT AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2008-00349 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN VICARDO GONSALVES CLAIMANT AND CHAN PERSAD DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HON. MADAME JUSTICE JOAN CHARLES Appearances: For the Claimant:

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Date of Release: May 1, 1992 No. 17176 Kamloops Registry IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: ) ) JACQUELYN BARBARA DAVIDSON ) ) REASONS FOR JUDGMENT PLAINTIFF ) ) OF THE HONOURABLE AND: )

More information

Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED. Updated to 13 April 2017

Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED. Updated to 13 April 2017 Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED Updated to 13 April 2017 This Revised Act is an administrative consolidation of the. It is prepared by the Law Reform Commission in accordance with its

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2011-00818 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between SURESH PATEL Claimant And THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Defendant Dated 25 th June, 2013 Before the Honourable Mr.

More information

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT (SA GG 5689) came into force in South Africa and South West Africa on date of publication: 1 June 1956 (see section 6 of Act) APPLICABILITY TO SOUTH WEST AFRICA: Section 6 originally stated This Act shall

More information

THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY PART II

THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY PART II THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT, 1999 Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY Section: 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Interpretation 4. Application of Act PART II ESTABLISHMENT, COMPOSITION

More information

PLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of this Act, please see the Table of Public Acts.

PLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of this Act, please see the Table of Public Acts. PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to November 1, 2003. It is intended for information and reference purposes only. This

More information

CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II

CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II State Liability and Proceedings 3 CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PRELIMINARY PART II SUBSTANTIVE LAW 3. Liability

More information

In the High Court of Justice. Shane Williams Dyer. And. Jermain Roachford, Marlon Dorwich

In the High Court of Justice. Shane Williams Dyer. And. Jermain Roachford, Marlon Dorwich In the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago In the High Court of Justice CV2008-04742 Between Shane Williams Dyer And Plaintiff Jermain Roachford, Marlon Dorwich Defendants Before The Honourable Mr. Justice

More information

MISTER BIG STUFF AUTO RENTALS LTD AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAME JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER JUDGMENT

MISTER BIG STUFF AUTO RENTALS LTD AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAME JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER JUDGMENT TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. No: 2010/0078 BETWEEN MISTER BIG STUFF AUTO RENTALS LTD CLAIMANT AND SHERWIN LOPEZ DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAME JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER APPEARANCES

More information

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #26 11 August 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to

More information

STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT

STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT Act 5 of 1953 15 October 1954 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1A. Short title 1B. Interpretation PRELIMINARY PART I SUBSTANTIVE LAW 1. Liability of State in contract 2. Liability of State

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry-Tobago) BETWEEN AND. Ms. D. Christopher-Noel; Mr. R. Singh and Ms. G. Jackman instructed by Ms. F.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry-Tobago) BETWEEN AND. Ms. D. Christopher-Noel; Mr. R. Singh and Ms. G. Jackman instructed by Ms. F. REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV. No.2009-02631 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry-Tobago) BETWEEN VERNON AND REID Claimant HER WORSHIP THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE JOAN GILL Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE

More information

IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT. BETWEEN CARRI ANNE JOSEPH residing at No 750 Cone Shell Drive, Bon Aire West, Arouca AND

IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT. BETWEEN CARRI ANNE JOSEPH residing at No 750 Cone Shell Drive, Bon Aire West, Arouca AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT WC 5 of 2009 BETWEEN CARRI ANNE JOSEPH residing at No 750 Cone Shell Drive, Bon Aire West, Arouca AND Applicant LOPARI LANDSCAPING

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAN FERNANDO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAN FERNANDO REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV NO. 2010-04129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAN FERNANDO IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION OF THE DISCIPLINARY OFFICER COMPLAINTS DIVISION TO INSTITUTE TWO DISCIPLINARY CHARGES

More information

INDIVISIBLE INJURIES

INDIVISIBLE INJURIES INDIVISIBLE INJURIES Amelia J. Staunton February 2011 1 CONTACT LAWYER Amelia Staunton 604.891.0359 astaunton@dolden.com 1 Introduction What happens when a Plaintiff, recovering from injuries sustained

More information

PART XVII COURT PROCEEDINGS

PART XVII COURT PROCEEDINGS 226. Appeals to High Court. PART XVII COURT PROCEEDINGS (1) A party who is dissatisfied with a decision of the Commission under this Act, may appeal to the High Court against any decision of the Commission

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JUANITA RIVERA and JESUS M. RIVERA, Plaintiffs-Appellants, UNPUBLISHED July 24, 2007 v No. 274973 Oakland Circuit Court ESURANCE INSURANCE CO, INC., LC No. 2005-071390-CK

More information

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND ST. LUCIA ELECTRICITY SERVICES LTD AND

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND ST. LUCIA ELECTRICITY SERVICES LTD AND SAINT LUCIA Claim No. SLUHCV2002/1144 BETWEEN: THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PEOPLE S DISCOUNT DRUGS LTD Claimant Consolidated with SLUHCV2003/0345 AND ST. LUCIA ELECTRICITY

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV2009-01581 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE FOR LEAVE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. MARITIME LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Defendant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. MARITIME LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Defendant THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. CV 2015-02046 BETWEEN NATALIE CHIN WING Claimant AND MARITIME LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable Mr.

More information

Checklist XX - Sources of Municipal and Personal Liability and Immunity. Subject matter MA COTA Maintenance of highways and bridges

Checklist XX - Sources of Municipal and Personal Liability and Immunity. Subject matter MA COTA Maintenance of highways and bridges Checklist XX - Sources of Municipal and Personal Liability and Immunity See also extensive case law in this volume under the sections identified below, and in the introduction to Part XV. A. Public highways

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN GANGADEEN SEEBARAN AND CHRISTINE SUCHIT STEVE SUCHIT FIRST DEFENDANT CAPITAL INSURANCE LIMITED JOEL BASCOMBE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN GANGADEEN SEEBARAN AND CHRISTINE SUCHIT STEVE SUCHIT FIRST DEFENDANT CAPITAL INSURANCE LIMITED JOEL BASCOMBE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2009-04028 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN GANGADEEN SEEBARAN AND CHRISTINE SUCHIT STEVE SUCHIT CLAIMANT FIRST DEFENDANT CAPITAL INSURANCE LIMITED JOEL BASCOMBE SECOND

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN REPUBLIC BANK OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. Alvin Pariaghsingh appearing Mr. Beharry instructed by Anand Beharrylal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN REPUBLIC BANK OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. Alvin Pariaghsingh appearing Mr. Beharry instructed by Anand Beharrylal REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No: CV: 2009-02354 BETWEEN LUTCHMAN LOCHAN TARADATH LOCHAN AND ASHKARAN JAGPERSAD REPUBLIC BANK OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO First Claimant

More information

ST. GEORGE WEST COUNTY PORT OF SPAIN PETTY CIVIL COURT

ST. GEORGE WEST COUNTY PORT OF SPAIN PETTY CIVIL COURT ST. GEORGE WEST COUNTY PORT OF SPAIN PETTY CIVIL COURT RULING CITATION: Raymond Alec Roberts v. Selwyn Herbert TITLE OF COURT: Port of Spain Petty Civil Court FILE NO(s): No. 252 of 2011 DELIVERED ON:

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS AJAX PAVING INDUSTRIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED July 1, 2010 APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION August 31, 2010 9:10 a.m. v No. 288452 Wayne Circuit

More information

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE Appeal No. UKEAT/0187/16/DA EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE At the Tribunal On 13 December 2016 Before THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MITTING (SITTING ALONE)

More information

Case Note. Carty v London Borough Of Croydon. Andrew Knott. I Context

Case Note. Carty v London Borough Of Croydon. Andrew Knott. I Context Case Note Carty v London Borough Of Croydon Andrew Knott Macrossans Lawyers, Brisbane, Australia I Context The law regulating schools, those who work in them, and those who deal with them, involves increasingly

More information

THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTIONS 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Definitions. 3. Liability to give relief in certain cases on principle of no fault. 4. Duty

More information

JUDGMENT. Meyer (Appellant) v Baynes (Respondent)

JUDGMENT. Meyer (Appellant) v Baynes (Respondent) Hillary Term [2019] UKPC 3 Privy Council Appeal No 0102 of 2016 JUDGMENT Meyer (Appellant) v Baynes (Respondent) From the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Antigua and Barbuda) before

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. Anand Beharrylal AND. Dhanraj Soodeen. Ricky Ramoutar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. Anand Beharrylal AND. Dhanraj Soodeen. Ricky Ramoutar THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD & TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2011-04453 BETWEEN Anand Beharrylal AND Claimant Dhanraj Soodeen Ricky Ramoutar First Defendant Second Defendant Before the Honourable

More information

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN Martin C.Ward Introduction: The Crown could not be sued at common law. The Courts were creations of the Crown and as such it could not be compelled

More information

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #78 19 April 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to

More information

JUDGMENT REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV BETWEEN D. C. DEVELOPERS LIMITED. Claimant AND

JUDGMENT REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV BETWEEN D. C. DEVELOPERS LIMITED. Claimant AND REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2006-02313 BETWEEN D. C. DEVELOPERS LIMITED AND Claimant MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS LIMITED Defendant Before The Honourable Mr.

More information

Client Update June 2008

Client Update June 2008 Highlights Relevance Of This Update Introduction Facts Of The Case High Court Ruling...2 The Decision Of The Court Of Appeal Foreseeability Of Damage Proximity The Class Of Persons Whose Claims Should

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D SECOND TIME LIMITED. KISS THIS LIMITED (dba Tackle Box Bar and Grill )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D SECOND TIME LIMITED. KISS THIS LIMITED (dba Tackle Box Bar and Grill ) CLAIM NO. 222 OF 2015 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2015 BETWEEN: SECOND TIME LIMITED Claimant AND KISS THIS LIMITED (dba Tackle Box Bar and Grill ) Defendant In Court. BEFORE: Hon. Chief Justice

More information

A breach of contract occurs where a party does not comply with one or more of the terms of contract, express or implied.

A breach of contract occurs where a party does not comply with one or more of the terms of contract, express or implied. CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG Breach and Remedy Refer to Richards, P. Law of Contract Chapters 16-18 Uff, J. Construction Law 9 th Edition Chapter 9 BREACH OF CONTRACT A breach of contract occurs where

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND ERROL BOODRAM TRADING AS PRICE RIGHT FURNITURE FACTORY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND ERROL BOODRAM TRADING AS PRICE RIGHT FURNITURE FACTORY REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2008-00409 DEVANAND NARINE BETWEEN Claimant AND ERROL BOODRAM TRADING AS PRICE RIGHT FURNITURE FACTORY Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PHILLIP QUASHIE CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PROPOSED DEFENDANT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PHILLIP QUASHIE CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PROPOSED DEFENDANT REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2009-02981 BETWEEN PHILLIP QUASHIE CLAIMANT AND THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PROPOSED DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HON. MADAME JUSTICE JOAN CHARLES Appearances:

More information

JUDGMENT. BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant)

JUDGMENT. BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant) Trinity Term [2015] UKSC 39 On appeal from: [2013] EWCA Civ 1513 JUDGMENT BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant) before Lord Mance Lord Sumption Lord Carnwath Lord Toulson Lord

More information

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS Between : - and -

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS Between : - and - IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT Case No: 2YJ60324 1, Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ Date: 29/11/2012 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : MRS THAZEER

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Stankovic v SS Family Pty Ltd & Anor [2018] QDC 54 PARTIES: MILJAN STANKOVIC (Plaintiff/Respondent) v SS FAMILY PTY LTD ACN 117 147 449 (Trading as Trendbuild ) (Defendant/Applicant)

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON FILED: June 0, 01 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON PETER LAMKA, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KEYBANK, a national association, Defendant-Respondent, and BRIDGE CITY WATERSPORTS,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGMENT In the matter between: Case No. 1272/2015 MFANZILE VUSI HLOPHE Plaintiff And THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH MATHOBELA SIPHESIHLE XOLILE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1 st Defendant

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO) BETWEEN. And

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO) BETWEEN. And THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO) Claim No. CV 2013-02152 BETWEEN SHELDON NECKLES Claimant And MONICA FORRESTER otherwise MONICA JOSEPHINE FORRESTER

More information

G.S. 1a-1. Rule 84 Page 1

G.S. 1a-1. Rule 84 Page 1 Rule 84. Forms. The following forms are sufficient under these rules and are intended to indicate the simplicity and brevity of statement which the rules contemplate: (1) Complaint on a Promissory Note.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DEOCHAN SAMPATH AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DEOCHAN SAMPATH AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2012-01734 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DEOCHAN SAMPATH Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO First Defendant TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

More information

ECONO CAR RENTALS LIMITED GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

ECONO CAR RENTALS LIMITED GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2013-00852 BETWEEN ECONO CAR RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND CINDY CHARLES GTM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Defendant Co-Defendant NAGICO INSURANCE

More information

Negligence: Approaching the duty of care

Negligence: Approaching the duty of care Negligence: Approaching the duty of care Introduction: Elements of negligence: - The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. - That the duty must have been breached. - That breach must have caused

More information

BELIZE LIMITATION ACT CHAPTER 170 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000

BELIZE LIMITATION ACT CHAPTER 170 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000 BELIZE LIMITATION ACT CHAPTER 170 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000 This is a revised edition of the law, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under the authority of the

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV2008-01078 C.A. No. 126 of 2010 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN LATCHMAN RAMOUTAR C.L. SINGH TRANSPORT SERVICES LTD. Appellants AND LENORE DUNCAN (in her

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) LTD t/a AVIS RENT A CAR NDWAMATO PHINIAS LAVHENGWA JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) LTD t/a AVIS RENT A CAR NDWAMATO PHINIAS LAVHENGWA JUDGMENT SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO BETWEEN. CURTIS LACKHANSINGH Claimant AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO BETWEEN. CURTIS LACKHANSINGH Claimant AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2007-00687 BETWEEN CURTIS LACKHANSINGH Claimant AND P. C. HAREWOOD No. 3831 AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendants Before

More information

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy Information or instructions: Plaintiff's original petition-auto accident 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit. 2. It assumes several plaintiffs were rear-ended by an employee

More information

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Customer (C) v. Businessman (B) Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Negligence requires a Breach of a Duty that Causes Damages. A. Duty B had a duty to drive as

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between AFRICAN OPTION. And DAVID WALCOTT. And BANK OF BARODA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between AFRICAN OPTION. And DAVID WALCOTT. And BANK OF BARODA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED THE REPUBIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2013-05221 Between AFRICAN OPTION First Claimant And DAVID WALCOTT Second Claimant And BANK OF BARODA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED

More information

MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75

MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark

More information

6.1 Part not to apply in certain cases (16.1, PD 16) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), this Part, except (a) rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.9 and 6.

6.1 Part not to apply in certain cases (16.1, PD 16) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), this Part, except (a) rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.9 and 6. PART 6 : CHAPTER 1: STATEMENTS OF CASE GENERAL 6.1 Part not to apply in certain cases (16.1, PD 16) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), this Part, except rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.9 and 6.11, rule 6.19(1) and (2),

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Gosselin v. Shepherd, 2010 BCSC 755 April Gosselin Date: 20100527 Docket: S104306 Registry: New Westminster Plaintiff Mark Shepherd and Dr.

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 36 of 2015 BETWEEN. A&N CONSTURCTION (A firm) AND HERITAGE BANK LIMITED DECISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 36 of 2015 BETWEEN. A&N CONSTURCTION (A firm) AND HERITAGE BANK LIMITED DECISION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D. 2015 (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 36 of 2015 BETWEEN A&N CONSTURCTION (A firm) Claimant AND HERITAGE BANK LIMITED Defendant Before: Date of hearing: Appearances: The Honourable

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between MOOTILAL RAMHIT AND SONS CONTRACTING LIMITED. And EDUCATION FACILITIES COMPANY LIMITED [EFCL] And

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between MOOTILAL RAMHIT AND SONS CONTRACTING LIMITED. And EDUCATION FACILITIES COMPANY LIMITED [EFCL] And THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2017-02463 Between MOOTILAL RAMHIT AND SONS CONTRACTING LIMITED Claimant And EDUCATION FACILITIES COMPANY LIMITED [EFCL] And

More information

Table of limitation periods

Table of limitation periods Table of limitation periods Limitation periods impose time limits within which a party may bring a claim or give notice of a claim to the other party. It is important that clients are appraised of all

More information