Search court decisions

…Rimita, J gave him an ex parte order on 4th July, 1994 and set the application down for hearing inter partes on 19th July, 1994.…

…Judge in the presence of counsel for both parties and by consent the order made the previous day confirming the ex parte injunction was set aside and the application by the respondent dated 29th June, 1994, was fixed for hearing…

…judge in assessing general damages failed to appreciate or to consider the fact that although the loss of one eye by itself would not be regarded as so serious an injury as the loss of one hand or one leg or the loss of hearing…

…in one ear, the loss of sight in both eyes would be a lot more serious than the loss of two legs or two hands or the total loss of hearing, and he should have awarded damages in the light of awards for such injuries.…

…application for amendment under rule 44 should be heard first by a single judge, as provided by rule 52 of the rules, without prejudice to the full bench’s right to give leave to amend on an informal application during the hearing…

…In the course of the hearing, the second defendant was permitted to amend his defence against the first defendant, by adding a counter-claim, and a fresh agreed statement of facts was put before the court, with a few facts…