Chang Time v Baptiste & Ors (CS 66/2014) [2020] SCSC 467 (13 March 2020)

Chang Time v Baptiste & Ors (CS 66/2014) [2020] SCSC 467 (13 March 2020)

The Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities to establish that the Defendants' conduct amounted to a 'faute' in law causing actionable damage. The evidence of loss or damage was insufficient and trivial, and the Plaintiff's own conduct contributed to the altercation.

Citation
[2020] SCSC 467
Parties
Plaintiff: Selmon Chang Time; 1st Defendant: Leroy Jean Baptiste; 2nd Defendant: Collin Marcel; 3rd Defendant: Janice Esparon; 4th Defendant: Corrin Esparon; 5th Defendant: Guyzela Mussoodee; 6th Defendant: Lita Marcel
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
13 March 2020
Case Number
CS 66/2014
Procedural Posture
Delictual Action / Judgment
Outcome
Plaint dismissed with costs in favour of the 1st to 5th Defendants.
Legal Topics
Delict, Faute, Harassment, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Tort Delict Faute Harassment Burden of Proof

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

Parties

Selmon Chang Time

Plaintiff

Leroy Jean Baptiste

1st Defendant

Collin Marcel

2nd Defendant

Janice Esparon

3rd Defendant

Corrin Esparon

4th Defendant

Guyzela Mussoodee

5th Defendant

Lita Marcel

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Delictual Action / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants committed a 'faute' in law by harassing, threatening, or blocking the Plaintiff and whether the Plaintiff suffered loss or damage as a result.

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities to establish that the Defendants' conduct amounted to a 'faute' in law causing actionable damage. The evidence of loss or damage was insufficient and trivial, and the Plaintiff's own conduct contributed to the altercation.

Court Disposition

Plaint dismissed with costs in favour of the 1st to 5th Defendants.

Orders

  • Plaint dismissed
  • Costs awarded to 1st to 5th Defendants