Delcy v Camille (CS 55/2001) [2005] SCSC 69 (26 October 2005)

Delcy v Camille (CS 55/2001) [2005] SCSC 69 (26 October 2005)

The order dated 7 February 2005 was interlocutory in nature as it related to enforcement of judgment and did not finally determine the rights of the parties; therefore, leave to appeal was required and, in its absence, the motion to stay execution does not arise for consideration.

Citation
[2005] SCSC 69
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Delcy; Judgment Debtor: Camille
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
26 October 2005
Case Number
CS 55/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Interlocutory Status and Stay of Execution
Outcome
Motion to stay execution dismissed for want of a valid appeal; no order for costs.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Vs Final Orders, Stay of Execution, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Interlocutory Vs Final Orders Stay of Execution Leave to Appeal

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Delcy

Judgment Creditor

Camille

Judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Interlocutory Status and Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order dated 7 February 2005 is interlocutory or final for purposes of appeal
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal was required before filing an appeal against the order of 7 February 2005
  3. 3 Whether a stay of execution can be granted in the absence of a valid appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The order dated 7 February 2005 was interlocutory in nature as it related to enforcement of judgment and did not finally determine the rights of the parties; therefore, leave to appeal was required and, in its absence, the motion to stay execution does not arise for consideration.

Court Disposition

Motion to stay execution dismissed for want of a valid appeal; no order for costs.