Permission to Appeal - June 2023
| Case Name | Justices | PTA | Reasons given |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Japs Fried Chicken Ltd (Respondent) v Nicholas Thomas (Appellant) (Trinidad and Tobago)
JCPC 2023/0024 |
Lord Reed Lord Kitchin Lady Rose |
Refused 3 July 2023 |
The application for an extension of time is refused on the ground that it would not be in the interests of justice for an extension to be granted. The panel would not in any event grant permission to appeal, as the appeal does not raise an arguable point of law or a point of law of general public importance. |
|
Zaid Mohammed (Appellant) v Zemco Ltd (Respondent) (Trinidad and Tobago)
JCPC 2023/0025 |
Lord Hodge Lord Hamblen Lord Stephens |
Refused 3 July 2023 |
The application for special leave to appeal is refused. Matters of procedure are for the local court or rule-making authority rather than the Board. |
|
Mohummud Siddick Chady (Appellant) v The State of Mauritius (Respondent) (Mauritius)
JCPC 2023/0012 |
Lord Lloyd-Jones Lord Leggatt Lord Richards |
Refused 30 June 2023 |
The application for permission to appeal is refused. There is no risk that a serious miscarriage of justice has occurred. |
|
Navinchandra Ramgoolam (Appellant) v Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) (Mauritius)
JCPC 2023/0029 |
Lord Lloyd-Jones Lord Leggatt Lord Richards |
Refused 30 June 2023 |
There is no appeal as of right in this case.
Permission to appeal is refused. There is no risk that a serious miscarriage of justice has occurred. |
|
Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (Respondent) v Keron Quamina and another (Appellants) (Trinidad and Tobago)
JCPC 2023/0028 |
Lord Briggs Lord Sales Lord Burrows |
Refused 26 June 2023 |
No arguable point of law
No point of law of general importance |
| In the following cases, the advice which the Board proposes to give to His Majesty is as indicated below | |||
|
Flying Dutchman Overseas Ltd and another (Appellants) v Port Authority and another (Respondents) (Antigua and Barbuda)
JCPC 2023/0049 |
Lord Briggs Lord Hamblen Lord Richards |
Refused 26 June 2023 |
Application for interim relief refused. Application for permission to appeal should be refused because there is no arguable case that Williams J erred in refusing interim relief at first instance. Therefore the claim is in practice limited to a claim for damages or monetary compensation. The Court of Appeal was therefore entitled to treat the application for permission to appeal against the other parts of the order of Williams J as non-urgent, and therefore entitled to adjourn it to the ordinary list. |
|
Marlan Higgins (Appellant) v Simeon Keith Brown and 3 others (Respondents) (Jamaica)
JCPC 2020/0067 JCPC 2021/0093 |
Lord Kitchin Lord Burrows Lady Rose |
Refused 21 June 2023 |
Permission should be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law; nor does the application raise a point of general public importance. The Board is also of the view, on the materials provided, that any appeal would be devoid of merit and have no prospect of success. |
|
Alexander Clack (Respondent) v The King (Appellant) (Grenada)
JCPC 2023/0001 |
Lord Hodge Lord Hamblen Lord Stephens |
Granted 3 July 2023 |
Permission to appeal should be granted. The appeal should be heard by five Justices, with a time estimate of one day. |
|
Andrey Titarenko (Appellant) v Emmerson International Corp. (Respondent) (British Virgin Islands)
JCPC 2023/0023 |
Lord Briggs Lord Sales Lord Burrows |
Refused 5 July 2023 |
Permission should be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law; nor does the application raise a point of law of general public importance. |
|
Fort Trustees Ltd and another (in their capacity as the trustees of the Tchenguiz Discretionary Trust) (Appellants) v ITG Ltd and another (Respondents) (Guernsey)
JCPC 2023/0027 |
Lord Briggs Lord Sales Lord Burrows |
Refused 5 July 2023 |
Permission should be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law; nor does the application raise a point of law of general public importance. |