Benoit v Interior and Construction Design (Pty) Ltd and Another (146 of 2007) [2008] SCSC 61 (5 February 2008)

Benoit v Interior and Construction Design (Pty) Ltd and Another (146 of 2007) [2008] SCSC 61 (5 February 2008)

The ex parte order should be vacated because there are no funds in the seized account, making the order unenforceable and causing undue hardship to the defendants' business operations.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] SCSC 61
Parties
Plaintiff: Michel Benoit; 1st Defendant: Interior & Construction Design (Pty) Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Sarah Sabadin
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
5 February 2008
Case Number
146 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Motion to Vary, Amend, Rescind or Void Ex Parte Order
Outcome
Motion granted; ex parte order vacated
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Orders, Variation of Court Orders, Bank Account Seizure
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Ex Parte Orders Variation of Court Orders Bank Account Seizure

Source-derived case record

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michel Benoit

Plaintiff

Interior & Construction Design (Pty) Ltd

1st Defendant

Sarah Sabadin

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Motion to Vary, Amend, Rescind or Void Ex Parte Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ex parte order of 29th August, 2007 should be varied, amended, rescinded or voided

Ratio Decidendi

The ex parte order should be vacated because there are no funds in the seized account, making the order unenforceable and causing undue hardship to the defendants' business operations.

Court Disposition

Motion granted; ex parte order vacated

Orders

  • Order to be served on Mauritius Commercial Bank (Seychelles) Ltd and counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent