Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

Court of Appeal of Turks and Caicos Islands

The Court of Appeal currently sits in sessions on Providenciales and the Court is made up of at least 3 Judges of Appeal.

It has the jurisdiction assigned to it by the Court of Appeal Ordinance. It considers appeals from the Supreme Court and the Labour Tribunal. It also sits as a Constitutional Court, considering questions that may be referred to it by the Attorney General under the Attorney General’s Reference of Questions Ordinance.

Visit website
https://judicial.tc
4 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Attorneys
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
4 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2013
GOVERNOR OF THE TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS, GOVERNMENT OF THE TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS v TRADE WIND INDUSTRIES LIMITED (CL-AP 3 of 2013) [2013] TCACA 2 (31 December 2013)
Appellants awarded 50% of costs below after mixed success on appeal; drafting-error and counsel-authority arguments rejected.
Costs — appellate costs awarded — discretion as to costs in the court below — effect of party’s alleged contractual drafting error on costs — refusal to entertain counsel authorization issue in costs determination.
 31 December 2013
May 2013
ROYAL BAY RESORT & VILLAS LTD v WENDY WONG (CL-AP 34 of 2012) [2013] TCACA 4 (9 May 2013)
Whether a beachfront resort assumed responsibility and owed guests a duty of care, and whether pleadings can be struck out.
Negligence — duty of care — omissions and duty to rescue — assumption of responsibility by resort operators (lifeguards, roped swimming area) — proximity and policy — strike‑out test — causation pleaded as matter for evidence.
 9 May 2013
April 2013
Munroe v Crown (CR-AP 53 of 2011) [2013] TCACA 1 (30 April 2013)
30 April 2013
January 2013
HANSCHELL AND ORS v REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT No 2 (CL-AP 33 of 2012) [2013] TCACA 3 (24 January 2013)
Registrar entitled to set legal aid fees; Chief Justice cannot unilaterally impose VHCC rates — appeal dismissed.
Administrative law – legal aid – distinction between grant of legal aid (Chief Justice) and setting of fees (Registrar) under Legal Aid Rules. Constitutional/fair trial – equality of arms requires absence of substantial disadvantage, not parity of prosecutorial and defence fees. Ultra vires – Chief Justice could not bind Registrar to implement VHCC scheme under existing Rules. Wednesbury/irrationality – Registrar’s fee decision was rational and adequately reasoned. Case management – VHCC/hourly schemes may be administratively burdensome in small jurisdictions.
 24 January 2013