Search court decisions

…’s process The plaintiff filed a plaint, and simultaneously filed an injunction application on 23rd June 2003.…

…The 1st defendant in their supporting affidavit depone that, “….the plaintiff’s conduct amounts to an abuse of the court’s process; that the plaintiff’s conduct greatly prejudices the 1st defendant who is unable to exercise…

…It seeks to stop the prosecution of the petition and its striking out for being frivolous, vexatious, an abuse of the court process and meant to embarrass the company.…

…It is contended by the petitioner that the application be struck out as a sham and abuses the court process. As the goods were supplied in 1996 to 1997, the company does not show liability has ever been disputed.…

…That the powers under that Section are used for the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the court process.…

…Plaintiffs counsel said the application is mischievous and is an abuse of the court process for it seeks to deny the plaintiff remedy against the other defendants.…

…The application was an abuse of the court process and intended to embarrass this Honourable court; ii.…

…His finding was that institution of the present application for revision when Constitutional Petition No. 50 of 2020 was subsisting was an abuse of the court process.…

…Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act gives this court inherent powers to make such orders as may be necessary for ends of justice to be met or to prevent abuse of the process of the court.…

…The power to strike out proceedings for abuse of court process is discretionary. In this case, the abuse complained of was beyond Plaintiff/Respondent’s control.…