IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between PAUL CHOTALAL. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
|
|
- Roderick Hicks
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. C.V Between PAUL CHOTALAL Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendants Before the Honourable Mr. Justice Frank Seepersad Appearances: 1. Mr. Rennie Gosine for the Claimant 2. Ms. Stephenie Ruth Sobrian and Ms. Kelisha Bello for the Defendant Date of Delivery: 30 th June, 2014 DECISION Page 1 of 10
2 1. Before the Court is the Defendant s Notice of Application filed on the 10 th March 2014 in which the Defendant seeks the following reliefs: a. That paragraphs 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18 and the first two lines of paragraph 8 from the words, At the Penal Police Station, the Claimant was placed in a cell. The Claimant was falsely imprisoned for a period of about fifteen (15) hours. of the Statement of Case of the Claimant, filed on 16 th January, 2014 be struck out in its entirety pursuant to Rules 26.1(1)(1), Rule 26.2.(1) (a), Rule (b) and Rule 56.7 of the Civil Proceedings Rules 1998 ( the CPR ); b. The Claimant s claims for damages for assault, false arrest and false imprisonment be struck out pursuant to Rule 26.1 (k), (l) and (w) of the CPR; c. The Claimant s claims for constitutional relief be struck out pursuant to Rule (b) and Rule 56.7 of the CPR and the claim for damages for malicious prosecution be extended pursuant to Part 10.3 of the CPR; and d. The costs of the matter be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant, to be assessed in default of agreement. 2. The issues to be determined are: i. Whether the Claimant s claims for damages for assault, false arrest and false imprisonment have been instituted after the expiration of the limitation period pursuant to section 3(1) a of the Limitation of Certain Actions Act Chp. 7:09 ii. Whether the said claims should be struck out pursuant to section 26.1(k), (l) and (w) of the Civil Proceedings Rules (1998) as amended. Page 2 of 10
3 iii. Whether the Claimant s claims for constitutional relief should be struck out. iv. Whether paragraphs 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18 and the first two lines of paragraph 8 from the words, At the Penal Police Station, the Claimant was placed in a cell. The Claimant was falsely imprisoned for a period of about fifteen (15) hours. of the Statement of Case should be struck out. Determination of issues (i) and (ii) 3. The Defendant relied on section 3 (1) a of the Limitations of Certain Actions Act Chp. 7:09 and submitted that the Claimant s claims as outlined at reliefs (a) and (c) of his Statement of Claim are statue barred and should be struck out. 4. In his submissions filed on the 29 th May 2014, Counsel for the Claimant conceded that the aforementioned claims became statue barred as at the 11 th November Accordingly the Claimant s claims for damages with respect to false arrest, battery and false imprisonment are hereby struck out. Issue iii 5. The Defendant submitted that the Claimant s claims in relation to the declaratory reliefs sought were not made in the proper form and that the requirements laid out at Rule 56.7 of the CPR had not been met. Counsel for the Defendant referred to the Court to the decision of the Board of the Privy Council in Antonio Webster v. The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (2011) UKPC 22, and submitted that the Claimant s claims for constitutional relief ought to have been instituted by way of a fixed date claim form. Page 3 of 10
4 6. The Court was also asked to consider the decision of the Board in Thakur Persad Jaroo v. The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (2002) UKPC 5 where the Board noted at paragraphs 2 as follows: The Appellant s case for the return of his vehicle was capable of being dealt with relatively simply in the ordinary courts in Trinidad and Tobago by means of processes which were available to him under the common law. It has been complicated by the fact that he chose to apply instead by way of an originating motion under section 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago 1976 to the High Court. The question whether it was appropriate for him to assert his constitutional rights in a case of this kind lies at the heart of this appeal. 7. In Thakur Persad Jaroo the Board upheld the conclusion of the Court of Appeal that the motion under s. 14(1) of the Constitution was an abuse of process because the appropriate claim was an action at common law. At paragraph 29 of the judgment the Board stated: The right to apply to the High Court which s.14 (1) of the Constitution provides should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances where there is a parallel remedy. 8. In Antonio Webster (supra) at paragraph 20 the Board stated: 20. In the present case and irrespective of the erroneous procedure which he adopted the Appellant, by his attorney, made two decisions about how to formulate his claim: one of them was right and the other was wrong. The right decision was primarily to formulate his claim, unlike the claim in Ramanoop, as being for damages in tort. The wrong decision was to include subsidiary claims for the three declarations: for they were redundant. Upon the filing of the Defence then, even on the assumption, in the Appellant s favour, that he had hitherto been unaware of its likely content, it should have become even more obvious to him Page 4 of 10
5 that the declarations had been wrongly included and that he should apply for permission to amend his claim form and his statement of case so as to delete them. Instead, once Pemberton J. had resolved to determine, as a preliminary issue, whether they had rightly been included, he argued in the affirmative; and indeed he appealed against her negative conclusion. Even at that stage, however, his then advocate came close to recognizing the folly of the appeal. For, in his written submissions to the Court of Appeal, he wrote: It is noteworthy that the Appellant sought no damages for the breach of his constitutional right but same is pleaded in his grounds for exemplary damages The Court can therefore articulate and make a finding that the Appellant s constitutional rights were violated and factor this into the award of exemplary Common Law damages. This cannot however be done in the absence of a declaration or finding that his constitutional rights were breached. (Italics supplied) The advocate was correct to submit that, were the Appellant to secure an award of exemplary damages reflective of breaches of his constitutional rights, the Appellant needed a finding that they had been broken. But the advocate was also correct to submit that a declaration to such effect would be alternative to such a finding and that there would be no additional need for it. 9. Having regard to the authorities, the Defendant submitted that the Claimant was wrong to have included prayers for constitutional relief within his claim, which was in essence a claim in tort and where the Claimant failed to demonstrate any special or exceptional circumstances. Counsel for the Claimant referred to the decision of Jamadar JA in the Court of Appeal in Antonio Webster, where the learned Justice of Appeal said: It is clear that Part 56, CPR, 1998 requires a claim for constitutional relief to be brought by Fixed Date Claim Form. It is also clear that this procedure is consistent with section 14 of the Constitution. However, this does not necessarily mean that a claim made by Claim Form which raises constitutional issues is an abuse of process or nullity Thus, the fact that a matter giving rise to Page 5 of 10
6 constitutional relief is commenced by Claim Form is not necessarily fatal to that action and does not necessarily render such a matter an abuse of process or a nullity. 10. Counsel for the Claimant also referred the Court to the case of Steve Singh v. The Attorney General CV in which the Claimant filed a claim for damages for false imprisonment as well as declaratory reliefs and the said action was instituted by an ordinary Claim Form. In the said action Rajkumar J stated at paragraph 4: I find that the Claimant is not precluded from seeking constitutional relief as well as private law relief in the same action, even if is commenced by Claim Form. The decision in Antonio Webster v. The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago C.A. Civ 113/2009 cited by the State, has been delivered by the Court of Appeal and apart from being bound by it, I entirely agree with it. 11. Counsel for the Claimant submitted that the reliefs sought in the Webster and Steve Singh cases are similar to the Claimant s reliefs and that the Claimant s claim for declaratory constitutional reliefs ought not to be struck out and that the decision in Steve Singh (supra) remains good law. Resolution of the Issue 12. At paragraphs 13 and 14 of the Webster decision, the Board of the Privy Council stated: It is clear that the Appellant was wrong to make his claim in Form 1. He should have made it in Form 2, as a fixed date claim, and have applied to the court under Rule 56.9(2) (b) for a direction that the whole application be dealt with as a claim and for directions for the filing of affidavits or witness statements, for the attendance of their makers for cross-examination if appropriate and for disclosure etc. under Part 26. The Board does not accept the Attorney General s submission which is not reflective of the treatment of the rule by the Court of Appeal that Rule 56.9 applies only to claims wrongly made as a fixed date claim in Form 2. But the Appellant s error in that regard was, of itself, likely to be of no consequence. So far as material. Rule 26.8 provides as follows: Page 6 of 10
7 (3) Where there has been an error of procedure or failure to comply with a rule, practice direction, court order or direction, the court may make an order to put matters right. Had it been appropriate for the claim for declarations to remain as part of the Appellant s claim, Rule 26.8(3) would, albeit probably on terms as to costs, surely have rescued him from his error. 13. It is therefore possible to permit a claim for constitutional relief as well as private law relief in the same action, even if the action was wrongly instituted by way of an ordinary claim form and the Court can issue the appropriate directions under Part 26.8(3) of the CPR. However, the Court should first consider whether it is appropriate for the declaratory relief sought to remain as part of the Claimant s case. 14. In the Antonio Webster (supra) case the Board raised this question at paragraphs 15 of the judgment and considered the said issue at paragraphs 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. At paragraph 20 the Board felt that the decision to include the claims for the declarations was wrong and that the declarations were redundant. 15. The declaratory reliefs sought by the Claimant in the instant case are substantially similar to the declarations that were sought in the Antonio Webster case. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the said claims for declaratory relief ought not to remain as a part of the Claimant s claim and they should be and are hereby struck out. 16. In addition, Counsel for the Defendant submitted that there has been substantial delay by the Claimant in instituting the instant action, with no reason for the delay being properly advanced, and that in such a circumstance the Court ought not to sanction a claim for constitutional relief. 17. Counsel also cited the case of Phillip Gerard Murphy v. Ireland and the Attorney General (1993 No. 3310P). In that case Carrol J, considered that the Plaintiff s claim while being for damages for breach of constitutional rights, also held all the hallmarks of the tort of procuring a breach of contract and that the statutory periods applicable to the tort should apply. This Court is however not prepared to apply that reasoning to the facts Page 7 of 10
8 of the instant case, the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago does not provide for a limitation period during which redress for breaches of fundamental rights, should be sought. 18. The charges against the Claimant were determined on the 2 nd July 2010 and the action however was filed on the 16 th January In the instance case no explanation has been advanced as to why the claimant took nearly four years after the charges were dismissed to institute the claim for declaratory relief under the Constitution. There is an onus on the Claimant to act promptly and with expedition. The Court must jealously guard the Constitution and complaints of violation demands the Court s urgent attention, if therefore there is delay in the institution of a claim in which complaints of breaches of constitutional rights are made, it is incumbent upon the Claimant to explain his delay. 20. In Felix Durity v. The Attorney General (2002) UKPC, the Board of the Privy Council pointed out that not only must a reason for the delay be advanced but, if the complaint being made was susceptible to adequate redress had a timely application been made then the delay in seeking constitutional relief would work against the Applicant unless there is some compelling reason and stated at paragraph 35: [35] In this context the Board considers it may be helpful if it makes certain general observations. When a Court is exercising its jurisdiction under s 14 of the Constitution and has to consider whether there has been delay such as would render the proceedings an abuse or would disentitle the Claimant to relief, it will usually be important to consider whether the impugned decision or conduct was susceptible of adequate redress by a timely application to the Court under its ordinary, non-constitutional jurisdiction. If it was, and if such an application was not made and would now be out of time, then, failing a cogent explanation the Court may readily conclude that the Claimant s constitutional motion is a misuse of the Court s constitutional jurisdiction. This principle is well established. On this it is sufficient to refer to the much repeated cautionary words of Lord Diplock in Harrikissoon v. A.G. (1979) 31 WIR 348 at 349. An application made under s Page 8 of 10
9 14 solely for the purpose of avoiding the need to apply in the normal way for the appropriate judicial remedy for unlawful administrative action is an abuse of process. 21. This Court is therefore of the view that the Claimant s unexplained delay in instituting his claims for constitutional relief is unacceptable and should not be allowed. The final issue to be determined in whether paragraphs 5, 7, 8 line 2, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17 and 18 of the Statement of Case ought to be struck out. 22. Having regard to the position as it relates to the claim for damages for arrest, battery and false imprisonment, paragraphs 5, 7, 18 (iii), 18 (iv), 18 (v) and 18 (vi) of the Statement of Case should be and are hereby struck out. In addition the words where he was falsely imprisoned for approximately ten (10) days at paragraph 11 line 4, should be and are hereby struck out and the words falsely imprisoned and at paragraph 18 (ii) should be and are hereby struck out and the words the Claimant was falsely imprisoned for a period of about fifteen (15) hours at paragraph 8 line 2 should be and are hereby struck out. 23. The Claimant s claim for damages for malicious prosecution remains to be determined before this Court, and the Court is therefore of the view that the information pleaded at paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 (as amended) and 18 (i) and 18 (ii) (as amended) are relevant to the issues that are to be determined by the Court. 24. The Court therefore orders as follows: a. The Claimant s claims for damages for assault, false arrest and false imprisonment be and are hereby struck out. b. The Claimant s claims for declarations are hereby struck out. c. Paragraphs 5, 7, 13, 14 and 17 and 18 (iii), (iv), (v) and (vi) of the Statement of Case be and are hereby struck out. d. The words the Claimant was falsely imprisoned for a period of about fifteen (15) hours at paragraph 8 line 2 be and are hereby struck out. Page 9 of 10
10 e. The words where he was falsely imprisoned for approximately ten (10) days at lines 4 to 5 of paragraph 11 of the Statement of Case be and are hereby struck out. f. The words falsely imprisoned and at paragraph 18 (ii) of the Statement of Case be and are hereby struck out. g. The Claimant is legally aided and there shall no order as to costs on the Notice of Application. FRANK SEEPERSAD JUDGE Page 10 of 10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JULIANA WEBSTER CLAIMANT AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2011-03158 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JULIANA WEBSTER CLAIMANT AND REPUBLIC BANK LIMITED PC KAREN RAMSEY #13191 PC KERN PHILLIPS #16295 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 113 of 2009 BETWEEN ANTONIO WEBSTER APPELLANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO RESPONDENT Civil Appeal No. 120 of
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2009-01937 BETWEEN PETER LEWIS CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. #2009/1536 BETWEEN JEFFREY JOHN CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANTS BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND RULING. that he was a prison officer and that on the 17 th June, 2006, he reported for duty at the
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. 2010/2501 BETWEEN ELIAS ALEXANDER Claimant AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER APPEARANCES
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO P.C. SAMAD P.C. PIERRE THIRD DEFENDANT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO: CV2007-04365 BETWEEN NIGEL APARBALL ROHIT APARBALL NEIL APARBALL BATCHYA APARBALL CLAIMANTS And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND
More informationRuling On the Application to Strike Out the Re-Amended Claim Form and Statement of Case
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO In the High Court of Justice Claim No. CV2015-01091 CHANTAL RIGUAD Claimant AND ANTHONY LAMBERT Defendant Appearances: Claimant: Defendant: Alexia Romero instructed
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PADMA DASS AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2012-03309 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PADMA DASS AND Claimant RAMNATH BALLY SHAZMIN BALLY Defendants Before the Honourable Justice Frank Seepersad
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CURTIS APPLEWHITE AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2017-00815 Between CURTIS APPLEWHITE AND Claimant COMMISSIONER OF POLICE First Defendant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Second
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL PORT OF SPAIN BETWEEN AND MYRTLE DOROTHY PARTAP MYRTLE DORTOTHY PARTAP
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL PORT OF SPAIN Civ. App. No. S051 of 2017 CV No. 2013-04212 BETWEEN CRISTOP LIMITED Appellant/Plaintiff AND MYRTLE DOROTHY PARTAP First Respondent/Defendant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE JUDITH JONES
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2014-02620 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN TERRENCE AND CHARLES Claimant CHIEF OF THE DEFENCE STAFF First Defendant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Second
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND. (POLICE CONSTABLE) EDGAR BAIRD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendants.
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE NO. CV 2009-00642 BETWEEN OTIS JOBE Claimant AND (POLICE CONSTABLE) EDGAR BAIRD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendants BEFORE
More informationIN THE MATTER OF MAGISTERIAL SUIT NO. 66 OF 2008 AND IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT 2000 PART 56.
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. 320 OF 2011 IN THE MATTER OF MAGISTERIAL SUIT NO. 66 OF 2008 AND IN THE EASTERN
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN ROLAND JAMES AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2013 03519 BETWEEN ROLAND JAMES CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice Ronnie
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between AINSLEY GREAVES. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. C.V. 2012-02753 Between AINSLEY GREAVES Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationPOLICE CONSTABLE RENNIE LAKHAN NO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO REASONS
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2010-01582 BETWEEN SIEULAL RAMSARAN CLAIMANT AND POLICE CONSTABLE RENNIE LAKHAN NO. 13429 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between DOREEN ALEXANDER-DURITY. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. 2013-01303 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between DOREEN ALEXANDER-DURITY Applicant/Intended Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Respondent/Intended
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 44 of 2014 BETWEEN ROLAND JAMES Appellant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Respondent PANEL: Mendonça, J.A.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And: Varner v. Vancouver (City), 2009 BCSC 333 Gary Varner Date: 20090226 Docket: S032834 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiff John Doe and Richard
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And. HER WORSHIP SENIOR MAGISTRATE MRS. INDRA RAMOO-HAYNES Defendant
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2012-00707 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between ALVIN And AHYEW Claimant HER WORSHIP SENIOR MAGISTRATE MRS. INDRA RAMOO-HAYNES Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and RYAN OLLIVIERRE
SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES CIVIL APPEAL NO.27 OF 2001 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: SYLVANUS LESLIE and RYAN OLLIVIERRE Appellant/Plaintiff Respondent/Defendant Before: The Hon. Sir Dennis Byron
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between DE VERTEUIL DANIEL VIVET HARRY DOWAGA DANIEL THERESA DANIEL
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2008-02860 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between DE VERTEUIL DANIEL VIVET HARRY DOWAGA DANIEL THERESA DANIEL 1 st Claimant 2 nd Claimant 3 rd Claimant 4 th Claimant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV2013-04279 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ACT 4 OF 1976 BEING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN (1) CENTRAL BANK OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (2) COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD) LIMITED AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2011-02140 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN (1) CENTRAL BANK OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (2) COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD) LIMITED AND (1) LAWRENCE DUPREY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE M.
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-01971 BETWEEN DANE DURHAM Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN REAL TIME SYSTEMS LIMITED APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Civil Appeal No. 238 of 2011 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN REAL TIME SYSTEMS LIMITED APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND RENRAW INVESTMENTS LIMITED, CCAM AND COMPANY LIMITED, AND AUSTIN
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2009-04393 BETWEEN TALAT TEDDY HOSEIN CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SELF HELP LIMITED Defendant JUDGMENT
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2012-00541 BETWEEN NICON & ASSOCIATES LIMITED Claimant AND NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SELF HELP LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable Mr.
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER RAJKUMAR
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO HCA: No.S-1452 of 2003 HCA: 2544 of 2003 (POS) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CURTIS GABRIEL Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CHARLES MITCHELL APPLICANT AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2008-02391 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CHARLES MITCHELL APPLICANT AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CHIEF FIRE OFFICER PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD AND TRINIDAD
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2011-03821 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JOHN HORSHAM Claimant AND ROOPNARINE S LINEN CLOSET AND INTERIOR ACCENTS LIMITED Trading as ROOPNARINE S LINEN CLOSET
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2009-02708 BETWEEN SYDNEY ORR APPLICANT AND THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des Vignes
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE RODNEY KHADAROO AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO: CV2011-04757 BETWEEN RODNEY KHADAROO AND CLAIMANT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Madam
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND PINKEY ALGOO ROOCHAN ALGOO RAJDAI ALGOO MEERA ALGOO AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2014-04731 BETWEEN KRISENDAYE BALGOBIN RAMPERSAD BALGOBIN Claimants AND PINKEY ALGOO ROOCHAN ALGOO RAJDAI ALGOO MEERA ALGOO First
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY FELIX JAMES FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. 2009-00439 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY FELIX JAMES FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER UNDER PART 56 OF THE CIVIL PROCEEDING RULES (1998)
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GARY LEGGE AND MAUREEN LEGGE. Between CHRIS RAMSAWACK AND WESTERN SHIP AND RIG SUPPLIES LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2013-00249 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GARY LEGGE 1 st Claimant AND MAUREEN LEGGE 2 nd Claimant Between CHRIS RAMSAWACK 1 st Defendant AND WESTERN SHIP AND RIG
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO JUDGMENT
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2010-05237 BETWEEN MIGUEL REGIS Claimant AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honorable Mr. Justice
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Sub Registry, San Fernando
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub Registry, San Fernando HCA NO. CIV. 2017-02985 EX PARTE 1. LYNETTE HUGHES, Representative of the Estate of CINDY CHLOE WALDROPT Deceased
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN MUKESH SIRJU VIDESH SAMUEL AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINDIAD AND TOBAGO DECISION
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2014-03454 BETWEEN MUKESH SIRJU VIDESH SAMUEL Claimants AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINDIAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF REFSERV LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT CHAPTER 81:01 BETWEEN RAJANAND BHIMULL AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2015-03563 IN THE MATTER OF REFSERV LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT CHAPTER 81:01 BETWEEN RAJANAND BHIMULL Claimant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN FRANCIS VINCENT AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2008-01217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN FRANCIS VINCENT AND Claimant Before: Master Alexander MERLENE VINCENT First Defendant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2012-00772 BETWEEN KELVIN DOOLARIE AND FIELD 1 st Claimant RAMCHARAN 2 nd Claimant PROBHADAI SOOKDEO BISSESSAR 1 st Defendant RAMCHARAN 2
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Civil Appeal No. P-186 of 2016 Claim No. CV 04374 of 2015 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. P- 190 of 2016 Claim No. CV 04374 of 2015 BETWEEN RAIN FOREST RESORTS LIMITED
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and. BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS ELECTRICITY CORPORATION Respondent
TERRITORY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL HCVAP 2008/010 BETWEEN: BRYON SMITH Appellant and BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS ELECTRICITY CORPORATION Respondent Before: The Hon. Mr. Hugh A. Rawlins The
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND SUMAIR MOHAN
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No: 45 of 2008 BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION APPELLANTS AND SUMAIR MOHAN RESPONDENT PANEL: A. Mendonça,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY, SAN FERNANDO H.C.A No. S-2253 of 2003 IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ( THE CONSTITUTION
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE DION SAMUEL AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2012-03170 BETWEEN DION SAMUEL AND Claimant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRININDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honorable Mr.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL. IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY LIBERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD (In Liquidation) AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 91 of 2015 Claim No. CV 04515 of 2009 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY LIBERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD (In Liquidation) AND ORDER
More informationTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2009-04042 BETWEEN PAUL WELCH CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DEFENDANT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE R. BOODOOSINGH
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DONALDSON-HONEYWELL
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV: 2013-04300 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN LAKHPATIYA BARRAN (also called DOWLATIAH BARRAN) CLAIMANT AND BALMATI BARRAN RAJINDRA BARRAN MAHENDRA BARRAN FIRST DEFENDANT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2016-03157 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO PART 56.3 OF THE CIVIL PROCEEDINGS RULES, 1998
More informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
SAINT LUCIA THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUIT NO:242 of 2001 BETWEEN Peter Clarke Claimant v The Attorney General et al Defendants Appearances Ms. Petra Nelson for Claimant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO DECISION-ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2010-04134 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PETER DEACON Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before: Master Margaret Y Mohammed Appearances:
More informationIN 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 informationIN 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 informationJUDGMENT. Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda)
Easter Term [2018] UKPC 11 Privy Council Appeal No 0077 of 2016 JUDGMENT Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda) From the Court of Appeal of the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. CV2018-00517 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION BY WINSTON SUTTON (THE SUBJECT OF A WARRANT OF ARREST) FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2014-02188 BETWEEN DEOLAL GANGADEEN Claimant AND HAROON HOSEIN Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice Robin N. Mohammed
More informationIN 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 informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between CHRISTOPHER LUCKY AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2012-00224 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between CHRISTOPHER LUCKY AND Claimant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 261 of 2017 BETWEEN
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D. 2017 (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 261 of 2017 BETWEEN MARIA MOGUEL AND Claimant/Counter-Defendant CHRISTINA MOGUEL Defendant/Counter-Claimant Before: The Honourable Madame Justice
More informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE RHONDA TAYLOR. And
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2009-00226 Between RHONDA TAYLOR And PRIEST TITRE PRESIDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ANDY SOOKHOO LATCHMAN BOLA INDUSTRIAL RENTALS LIMITED
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 146 of 2009 BETWEEN URIC MERRICK APPELLANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND JOHN ROUGIER THE COMMISSIONER OF PRISONS
More informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
. t! ~ CLAIM NO: ANUHCV2010/0406 THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITION OF ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA SECTION 9(1) AND IN THE MATTER
More informationIN 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 informationIN 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 informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 86 of 2007 IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONSTITUTIONAL
More informationIN 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 informationIN 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY RYAN RAMPERSAD FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. 2015-01543 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY RYAN RAMPERSAD FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND IN THE MATTER OF THE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL KEITH MITCHELL. and [1] STEVE FASSIHI [2] GEORGE WORME [3] GRENADA TODAY LTD [4] EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD
GRENADA CIVIL APPEAL NO.22 OF 2003 BETWEEN: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL KEITH MITCHELL and [1] STEVE FASSIHI [2] GEORGE WORME [3] GRENADA TODAY LTD [4] EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD Before: The Hon. Mr. Michael Gordon,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAND AND TOBAGO Defendant
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No.: CV2011-04900 BETWEEN DENZIL FORDE Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAND AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between IAN GREEN AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2015-02467 Between IAN GREEN Claimant AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Defendant Before The Honourable Mr. Justice Frank Seepersad
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL. BETWEEN MYRTLE CREVELLE, (ADMINISTRATRIX AD LITEM OF THE ESTATE OF CLYDE CREVELLE (deceased)) Appellant AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIV. APP. NO. 45 OF 2007 HCA NO. 117 OF 2003 BETWEEN MYRTLE CREVELLE, (ADMINISTRATRIX AD LITEM OF THE ESTATE OF CLYDE CREVELLE (deceased)) Appellant AND THE ATTORNEY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BALLIRAM ROOPNARINE. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV2007-04461 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BALLIRAM ROOPNARINE Claimant And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant Before Hon. Madame Justice C. Pemberton
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between DE VERTEUIL DANIEL VIVET HARRY DOWAGA DANIEL THERESA DANIEL
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2008-02860 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between DE VERTEUIL DANIEL VIVET HARRY DOWAGA DANIEL THERESA DANIEL 1 st Claimant 2 nd Claimant 3 rd Claimant 4 th Claimant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF And
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No.: CV2008-03639 IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACT NO. 60 OF 2000 And IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY STEVE FERGUSON AND ISHWAR
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN TARANDAYE DILRAJ AND KHADARNATH GILDHARE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO) LIMITED DECISION
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE HCA S 570 of 2001 BETWEEN TARANDAYE DILRAJ Plaintiff AND KHADARNATH GILDHARE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO) LIMITED Defendants Before:
More informationECONO 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN JOSEPH BERNARD-BANFIELD AND THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2009-01926 BETWEEN JOSEPH BERNARD-BANFIELD AND Claimant SARGEANT SOOKRAM REG NO. 9200 First Defendant THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MRS. LISA RAMSUMAIR-HINDS. And RUSSELL DAVID
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. P028 of 2015 Between THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MRS. LISA RAMSUMAIR-HINDS And RUSSELL DAVID Appellants Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between KERN COOKE. And POLICE CONSTABLE ADRIAN TOUSSAINT. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO.
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. C.V. 2015-00531 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between KERN COOKE And POLICE CONSTABLE ADRIAN TOUSSAINT And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claimant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO JUDGMENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DEAN-ARMORER
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2007-2686 Between LENNON RICHARDSON First Claimant JASON ALLEYNE Second Claimant and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between CESARE BURKE. And HIS WORSHIP DEPUTY CHIEF MAGISTRATE MR. PATRICK MARK WELLINGTON
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. C.V. 2013-05041 Between CESARE BURKE Applicant/Claimant And HIS WORSHIP DEPUTY CHIEF MAGISTRATE MR. PATRICK MARK WELLINGTON Respondent/Defendant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN SANJEEV RAMGARIB AND HER WORSHIP MAGISTRATE REHANNA HOSEIN
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2015 00266 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN SANJEEV RAMGARIB Applicant AND HER WORSHIP MAGISTRATE REHANNA HOSEIN Respondent Before the Honourable Mr Justice Ronnie
More informationIN 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 informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (DIVORCE) -and- GLENFORD DAVID PAMELA SERAPHINE INTERNATIONAL (BVI) MOVERS LTD
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS Claim No. BVIHCV2009/0384 THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (DIVORCE) BETWEEN ANJU DHAR KAPIL DHAR -and- GLENFORD DAVID PAMELA SERAPHINE INTERNATIONAL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN ADRIANA RALPH LEE RALPH AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CIVIL APPEAL No. 98 of 2011 CV 2008-04642 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN ADRIANA RALPH LEE RALPH AND APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS WEATHERSHIELD SYSTEMS CARIBBEAN LIMITED RESPONDENT/
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between NIXON CALLENDER JILLIAN BEDEAU-CALLENDER AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. 2013-01906 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between NIXON CALLENDER JILLIAN BEDEAU-CALLENDER Claimants AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
More information