Supreme Court of Turks and Caicos Islands

The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters; appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the Magistrate’s Court and other statutory bodies such as the National Insurance Board and the Liquor Licensing Board; and supervisory jurisdiction over lower adjudicatory bodies and the actions of government.

Visit website
https://judicial.tc/
4 judgments
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
4 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
January 2010
Non-compliance with court timetable justified costs and time extension but not strike-out absent contumelious delay.
Civil procedure — Appeals from Magistrate’s Court — Inherent jurisdiction of Supreme Court to manage appeals and prevent abuse of process — Strike out for contumelious or inexcusable delay — Requirements for summary dismissal — Costs consequences for non-compliance with court timetable; application of s.172 cap to lump-sum daily awards.
29 January 2010
Court continued worldwide freezing order, took account, found US$85,037,331.63 due, struck out defendants’ counterclaim, ordered payment and costs.
Civil procedure – Mareva (freezing) injunction – continuation of ex parte freezing order – real risk of dissipation; Contract and remedies – guarantor liability – account as equitable remedy to ascertain debt; Contract interpretation – effectiveness of express "no set‑off/counterclaim" clauses; Striking out – counterclaim and defence struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action and abuse of process; Evidence – admission of receiver’s late affidavit and parties afforded opportunity to respond.
28 January 2010
Application to appoint arbitrator refused where insured accepted payment as full and final settlement.
Insurance law – settlement acceptance – signed proforma constituting full and final settlement; Arbitration – applicability where payment accepted; Procedural – insufficiency of affidavits; Arbitration Ordinance s.6(1)(a).
18 January 2010
A protection order may only be continued if objectively necessary, not merely because it is 'prudent'.
Domestic Proceedings Ordinance s17(2) – protection / non‑molestation orders – continuation requires objective necessity not mere prudence – power of arrest requires specific reasons and duration – relevance of passage of time and absence of breaches – rehearing on record.
5 January 2010