Lewis, Earle and Lewis, Carol v Valley Slurry Seal Company, Reed, Jeffrey and Valley Slurry Seal Caribbean Limited
Company law - Section 212 of the Companies Act - Application for leave to bring derivatice action in the name and on behalf of the company - Company and not the proposed defendants the propert party to the application for leave - Required to receive notice of applicaion for leave - Whetehr applicants are 'complainants' - 3 conditions precedent - Notice to directors, good faith, appears to be int he interests of the company that action be brought - Whether fulfilled.
Valley Slurry Seal Co. and Valley Slurry Seal (Caribbean) Limited v Lewis, Earl and Lewis, Carl
Civil Practice and Procedure - Summary judgment
Watts, Leslie (By Lloyd Barnette, his next friend and Guardian Ad Litem) v Watts, Lelieth and Watts Investments Limited
Contract law - Mental capacity of elderly father, suffering from cognitive deficiency - Undue influence – Presumption - Unconscionability of transactions - Company law - Validity of alterations of share capital, shareholders and officers.
Wallace, Mavis v Clarke, Vernal
Property dispute - Joint tenants - Intimate relationship but not truly cohabiting - Common intention - Resulting trust - Alternatively share based on what is fair and just in circumstances.
Petrojam Limited v Sea Ventures Shipping Ltd, Worldwide Green Tankers et al
Civil practice and procedure - Application to vary or revoke order - Application made before order perfected - Sparing exercise of power - Overriding objective to be pursued, subject to principled curtailment of the principle.
Jade Overseas Holdings Limited v Palmyra Properties Limited (In Receivership), Santuary Systems Limited (In Receivership) and
Interlocutory injunction - course like to cause the least irremediable prejudice - Need for court to engage in assessment of strength of parties cases - Case involving mainly construction of agreement/written instruments/points of law - Whether court can feel high degree of assurance that at trial would appeal injunction rightly granted - Whether claimant guilty of delay - Securities - Fixed or floating charge - Debenture - Restrictive clauses in debenture - Priority of charges - Whether management agreement void as maintenance of champerty - Whether management agreement constitutes sale or
Jamaica Public Service Company Limited v Campbell, Enid and Clarke, Marcia
Easement - Right of way – Way - leave – Electric Lighting Act – Sections 36, 37 – Meaning of curtilage – trespass to land – Acquiescence – C ivil Practice and Procedure – Equitable damages ordered in lieu of permanent mandatory injunction – Date for assessment of value - Date of breach or loss or date of judgment – Civil practice and procedure – Damages – Aggravated damages
Loderick Robinson v Y.P. Seaton And Associates
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF &u/c
IN COMMON LAW
SUIT NO. C.L. 1999/R047
BETWEEN LODERICK ROBINSON CLAIMANT
A N D Y.P. SEATON AND ASSOCIATES DEFENDANT
Miss V. Grant instructed by H.G. Bartholomew & Co
for Claimant
Mr. John Graham instructed by John G. Graham & Co. for Defendant
1 5th arch, 1 6th March and 1 " April 2004
MANGATAL, J
1. This claim by Loderick Robinson is a claim against his employers
in negligence. Mr. Robinson was injured on the 6th August 1996
Josephine Lyons v Vernon Lyons
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA
IN EQUITY
SUIT NO. E. 327 OF 2002
In the Matter of the Married
Women's Property Act
AND
In the matter of the Division of
Property
BETWEEN JOSEPHINE LYONS APPLICANT
AND VERNON LYONS DEFENDANT
Mr. Lawrence Haynes for the Applicant
Mr. Michael Palmer instructed by Palmer, Smart
& Co. for the Defendant
Heard: 2nd, isth March and 21'' May, 2004 c\
MANGATAL J.
Tri-Star Engineering Company Limited v Alu-Plastics Limited and Josephs, Pamela and Josephs, Judith
Civil practice and procedure - Freezing order - Whether discharge of injunction on grounds of non-disclosure or whether injunction not to be continued until trial - Whether good arguable case of breach of trust or breach of contract - Wheher claimant entitled to produce without prejudice correspondence from dependant at ex parte hearing - Whether risk of dissipation of assets - Hardship to dependant - Whether order just and convenient in all circumstances.
Pagination
- Previous page
- Page 2
- Next page