Visit UKSCAll cases
950 Cases
JCPC/2022/0036
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:Were the Respondents lawfully entitled to detain the Appellant on the basis that they were arranging his deportation, and, if so, was 3 month a reasonable period? Did the Court of Appeal err in the assessment of damages and award of interest? Did the Court of Appeal err in its costs award?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2019/0118
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Awaiting hearing dateCase summary:Whether the Supreme Court of Mauritius was correct to find the Appellant, Mr. Stephen Anthony Aldridge, liable for having breached the Companies Act 2001 for having debited the bank account of the Respondent, Mordaunt Estates Ltd., and credited his own account for the sum of GBP 615,000.
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2022/0084
•
PUBLIC LAW/HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Was the Appellant's constitutional right to freedom of expression contravened? If there was an unconstitutional contravention of the Appellant's right to freedom of expression, what remedies is he entitled to?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2023/0103
•
CRIME
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in its interpretation of the Civil Asset Recovery and Management and Unexplained Wealth Act No 8 of 2019 (the “Act”) in finding that the Preliminary Unexplained Wealth Order (“PUWO”) originally imposed under that Act and then set aside by the High Court could be reinstated, including as against the Estate of Sheldon Spring?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2023/0067
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment givenCase summary:(i) Was the Court of Appeal wrong because it did not overturn the decision of the trial judge to strike out Mr Hosein’s constitutional claim on the basis of various factors, in particular the availability of a parallel remedy and the delay in bringing proceedings? (ii) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to conclude there was no evidence of apparent bias on the part of the trial judge?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2023/0007
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in: - failing to apply the established case law and principles in relation to the Respondent's challenge of the DPP's decision to continue the prosecution and/or in relation to whether the criminal trial judge had sufficient and appropriate tools to deal with the Respondents' complaints; - concluding that the DPP's decision to allow the criminal trial process to deal with the Respondent's complaints was so exceptional as to be reviewable on the grounds of irrationality and/or abuse of process; - concluding that it was unnecessary to the High Court's reasoning to make a finding that the DPP's sole eyewitness had committed perjury; and - concluding that the High Court was correct to have granted leave for judicial review.
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2023/0010
•
EMPLOYMENT
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in revising downwards the quantum of damages awarded to the Appellant for the unlawful termination of his employment.
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2020/0078
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the relevant contract was one between a principal and agent or a contract of sale and resale? If the contract was between a principal and agent, did the agent exceed its authority when it entered into various agreements to sell certain land? If the agent did exceed its authority, were the agent's actions ratified by the principals?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2022/0023
•
EMPLOYMENT
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the Supreme Court of Mauritius were correct to overturn the Industrial Court's decision that the Appellant had not wrongly and unjustifiably terminated the Respondent's employment.
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2021/0069
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment givenCase summary:A landowner has the right to recover possession of his land if it is occupied without his authorisation by another person, including a former tenant. The landowner must bring his claim within sixteen years. The issues in this appeal are: (1) whether the sixteen year period begins to run from the date on which rent was last paid, and, if so, (2) when rent was last paid in respect of the land with which this case is concerned.
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2023/0011
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the Supreme Court of Mauritius err in refusing an application brought by the victim of an alleged fraud seeking to compel an innocent third party to disclose information relating to the alleged fraud?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2022/0028
•
TAX
Judgment givenCase summary:Was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that the minimum requirements for an acting appointment to Field Auditor III include that the officer possess a professional accountancy qualification?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2022/0067
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in its assessment of the alleged breaches of the Appellants' constitutional rights?
Last updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2024/0087
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) Making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) Finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) Finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.
Linked casesLast updated: 19 May 2026
JCPC/2024/0088
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) Making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) Finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) Finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 19 May 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.