F B Choppy (Pty) Ltd v NJS Construction (Pty) Ltd (CS 29/2010) [2011] SCSC 52 (26 June 2011)

F B Choppy (Pty) Ltd v NJS Construction (Pty) Ltd (CS 29/2010) [2011] SCSC 52 (26 June 2011)

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for a stay of execution, did not provide adequate security, and did not show that the respondent would be unable to repay the decretal sum if the appeal succeeded. The balance of convenience favours refusal of the stay.

Citation
[2011] SCSC 52
Parties
Applicant: CHOPPY; Respondent: NSJ CONSTRUCTION
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
26 June 2011
Case Number
CS 29/2010
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Consolidation of Suits, Security for Judgment, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Arbitration Stay of Execution Consolidation of Suits Security for Judgment Appeal Procedure

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 6 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHOPPY

Applicant

NSJ CONSTRUCTION

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient security for the judgment sum
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would be able to repay the decretal amount if the appeal succeeds

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for a stay of execution, did not provide adequate security, and did not show that the respondent would be unable to repay the decretal sum if the appeal succeeded. The balance of convenience favours refusal of the stay.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution is dismissed
  • Applicant to pay costs