Phillip Rath v Berard Monthy (Civil Suit No.110 of 2006) [2012] SCSC 34 (31 October 2012)

Phillip Rath v Berard Monthy (Civil Suit No.110 of 2006) [2012] SCSC 34 (31 October 2012)

The plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probability that the defendant was the cause of the damage suffered. There was no evidence connecting the defendant to the cause of the incident. Without establishing liability, the claim fails.

Citation
[2012] SCSC 34
Parties
Plaintiff: Phillip Rath; Defendant: Berard Monthy
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
31 October 2012
Case Number
Civil Suit No.110 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (consolidated) / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's suits dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Nuisance, Damages, Trespass, Breach of Court Order
Source Language
English
Tort Property Law Negligence Nuisance Damages Trespass Breach of Court Order

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Rath

Plaintiff

Berard Monthy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (consolidated) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for the collapse of the retaining wall and resulting damage to the plaintiff's property
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff proved loss and damage attributable to the defendant
  3. 3 Whether the defendant breached a court order regarding repairs

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probability that the defendant was the cause of the damage suffered. There was no evidence connecting the defendant to the cause of the incident. Without establishing liability, the claim fails.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suits dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Both suits dismissed with costs to the defendant.