Severe Investments (Pty) Ltd v Camille (CS 152/2018) [2019] SCSC 1274 (4 September 2019)

SeyLII

Automated Summary

Key Facts

Severe Investments (Pty) Ltd sued Mr. Dominic Camille for unauthorized use of company services and facilities, claiming SCR 2,073,015.68. During the hearing on July 30, 2019, the defendant attempted to call Mr. Joseph Albert for personal answers, but the plaintiff objected, arguing the summons was untimely. The court ruled that the defendant could file a petition to examine the plaintiff on personal answers before the next hearing on September 27, 2019, under sections 162-167 of the Seychelles Code of Civil Procedure.

Issues

The court considered whether the defendant could apply to examine Mr. Joseph Albert (plaintiff's director) on personal answers under Seychelles Code of Civil Procedure sections 162-166 after missing the initial deadlines for such applications. The key issue was whether the two-day hearing arrangement justified a late application when the defendant failed to act promptly despite having sufficient time to file the petition before the first hearing date.

Holdings

The court determined that the defendant may proceed to file a petition to examine the plaintiff on its personal answers at the next hearing date (27th September 2019), as he has not yet closed his case and the hearing was fixed for two days. However, this is conditional upon the petition being filed and addressed prior to the continuation hearing.

Remedies

The court permitted the defendant to file a petition to examine the plaintiff on personal answers at the next hearing on 27th September 2019, subject to the petition being filed and dealt with prior to that date.

Legal Principles

The court applied procedural rules regarding examination on personal answers under the Seychelles Code of Civil Procedure (sections 162-166). It emphasized that a party must petition the court ex-parte to examine an adverse party before the hearing date, and once a party has closed their case, they cannot later request personal answers. The ruling also referenced the importance of timely applications to ensure fair and expeditious proceedings.

Precedent Name

  • Chez Deenu v Loizeau
  • Public Utilities Corporation v Willian Herminie

Cited Statute

Seychelles Code of Civil Procedure

Judge Name

Carolus J

Passage Text

  • [14] Since a further hearing date has been fixed for continuation of hearing of this matter, I see no harm in allowing the defendant to file his petition to call the plaintiff to be examined on its personal answers, in particular as this has been done before he has closed his case in accordance with section 166 of the SCCP.
  • 166. The examination on personal answers shall be in open court at the hearing of the cause or matter, but no party having closed his case shall be allowed thereafter to examine the adverse party on his personal answers.
  • Examination on personal answers is a legal right that should not be denied to a claimant except on very strong grounds. Such grounds include where physical attendance is impossible or dangerous to life, or if it is proved that the person to be examined has no connection with the issue.