30 Jan 2026
The court dismissed the first respondent's application because the impugned costs orders were either originally absolute or had become absolute, the time for appealing them had expired, and the application was manifestly lacking any legal basis.
22 Mar 2001
The Court held the lump sum order was a final order as it determined rights between the parties and the dispute concerned the respondent's civil right to receive the lump sum; because the amount in issue met the $1,000,000 threshold in s.22(1)(a), leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was granted as of right.
7 Jun 1988
A consent order made on judicial separation cannot lawfully be construed so as to deprive the court of its statutory jurisdiction under s.4 Cap.192 to entertain applications for ancillary relief following a subsequent decree of divorce or nullity; where a consent order purports to do so it must be amended to reflect the court's continuing jurisdiction and the appeal allowing such amendment is warranted.