In the matter of Rath v Gill (MA 144/2018) [2018] SCSC 8240 (2 August 2018)

In the matter of Rath v Gill (MA 144/2018) [2018] SCSC 8240 (2 August 2018)

The plaintiff's affidavit failed to disclose facts within her knowledge to support the application for amendment, instead relying on her attorney's belief, which is insufficient to meet the requirements of Article 146 and 170 of the Code. The objection is allowed and the motion is dismissed.

Citation
[2018] SCSC 8240
Parties
Plaintiff: Aisha Rath; Respondent: Simon Gill
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
2 August 2018
Case Number
MA 144/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Motion to Amend Plaint
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Affidavit Requirements
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Affidavit Requirements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aisha Rath

Plaintiff

Simon Gill

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Motion to Amend Plaint

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's affidavit in support of the motion to amend the plaint discloses sufficient facts to justify granting leave to amend

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's affidavit failed to disclose facts within her knowledge to support the application for amendment, instead relying on her attorney's belief, which is insufficient to meet the requirements of Article 146 and 170 of the Code. The objection is allowed and the motion is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • Objection of the defendant is allowed
  • Plaintiff's motion to amend plaint is dismissed