Visit UKSCAll cases
822 Cases
JCPC/2024/1003
•
TAX
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 8 July 2025
JCPC/2023/0091
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err by disturbing the trial Judge’s share valuation methodology?
Last updated: 8 July 2025
JCPC/2024/1004
•
EMPLOYMENT
Appeal issuedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the Industrial Court’s ruling that the Appellant is the successor to British West Indian Airways and therefore bound to recognise the Respondent as one of its recognised majority unions under the Industrial Relations Act?
Last updated: 8 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0043
•
INSOLVENCY
Appeal issuedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err (1) by concluding that the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of Mauritius had granted the Appellant leave under section 154(1)(c) of the Insolvency Act to continue the Plaint in the name and on behalf of the Respondent; and (2) by failing to treat the application as one to enable the Appellant to apply under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and section 174(3)(a) of the Insolvency Act for leave to continue the Plaint as a derivative claim?
Linked casesLast updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0044
•
INSOLVENCY
Appeal issuedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err (1) by concluding that the Bankruptcy Division of the Supreme Court of Mauritius lacked jurisdiction to grant leave for the Appellant to continue the Plaint as a derivative claim in the name and on behalf of the Respondent; (2) by holding that the application could not be granted ex parte; and (3) if the application could be granted ex parte, by failing to consider that no prejudice was thereby caused to the Respondent?
Linked casesLast updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0048
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Appeal issuedCase summary:Is the mortgage agreement between the parties void or voidable on the basis of (i) total failure of consideration or (ii) mistake or frustration? Did the respondent bank have a duty to deliver good and marketable title? Did the instructed attorneys act for the bank such that the bank ought to sue them rather than the appellant for negligence in failing to report on title defects?
Last updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0061
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2024/0045
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Was the Court of Appeal wrong to reduce the costs that the Appellant could recover from the Respondent? In particular, is there a general rule that brief fees for counsel are irrecoverable as costs in habeas corpus applications?
Last updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2024/0037
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the First Respondent breach the fiduciary (professional) duties that it owed to the Appellant as trustee?
Last updated: 7 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0060
•
FAMILY
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 4 July 2025
JCPC/2024/0064
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Under a 1975 agreement, was the Appellant entitled to purchase: (a) a 56.5 acre parcel of land; or (b) a parcel of land of a size yet to be confirmed?
Last updated: 4 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0028
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Were the lower courts wrong to conclude that the Appellant held only a legal interest and not a beneficial interest in the matrimonial home?
Last updated: 4 July 2025
JCPC/2024/0020
•
Hearing listedCase summary:Was the appellant eligible for the position of acting Deputy Chief Fire Officer prior to and/or after August 2019, and by failing to consider him for the post did the first and second respondents: (i) act irrationally, illegally and/or unfairly; (ii) breach Regulation 155 of the Public Service Commission Regulations; (iii) breach the appellant’s right to protection of the law under Section 4(b) of the Constitution, and consequently the appellant’s right to procedural protection under Section 5(2)(h) of the Constitution; and, (iv) breach a legitimate expectation that he would be considered?
Last updated: 3 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0030
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err by breaching the Appellant’s fair trial rights, in failing to provide sufficient reasons and consideration to the Appellant’s submissions?
Last updated: 3 July 2025
JCPC/2025/0012
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err by: (1) Failing to give effect to a later contract, known as the “2014 agreement”, which allegedly remained a valid agreement. (2) Conducting an enquiry into sums paid under an earlier agreement, known as the “2007 agreement”, rather than acknowledging the 2014 superseded this agreement. (3) Failing to appreciate that section 11 of the Moneylenders Act was inapplicable to the 2014 agreement. (4) Failing to consider that, if the 2014 agreement was nevertheless non-compliant with section 11, then the Appellant was entitled to relief under the principles of unjust enrichment.
Last updated: 3 July 2025
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.