Samuel v Joseph et Al

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Judge: Bernard, C.J.
• Judgment Date: 01 June 1993
• Neutral Citation: TT 1993 CA 13
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No. 98 of 1987
• Court: Court of Appeal (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Date: 01 June 1993

Court of Appeal

Bernard, C.J., Gopeesingh, J.A.; Hosein, J.A

Civil Appeal No. 98 of 1987

Samuel

and

Joseph et al

Mr. W.B. Gaspard appeared on behalf of the applicant/appellant

Mr. M. Haynes appeared on behalf of the Third Party

No appearances for the respondent/defendant

Practice and Procedure - Appeal — Privy Council — Rules governing applications for conditional leave to apply to Privy Council.

Bernard, C.J.

1 This is the application by the applicant/appellant for conditional leave to council against the judgment that was delivered against her by March this Court on 30th March, 1993, and in favour of Arjun Joseph and Everald Gerald, the defendant/respondent and the third party in the action respectively.

2 Miss Samuel's application was dated 21st May, 1993 and filed in the Registry on the said day. This was some fifty-two days after the delivery of the judgment by this Court.

3 Appeals to the Privy Council are governed by the Trinidad and Tobago (Procedure in Appeals to Privy Council) Order in Council 1962. This Order has been adopted by and incorporated into the Trinidad and Tobago Republican Constitution 1976.

4 Under the Order in Council in question applications for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council are governed by Rule 3 of the Rules made thereunder. This Rule specifically provides that application for conditional leave must be made by motion or petition within twenty-one days of the date of the judgment to be appeal from.

5 The next Rule, namely Rule 4, deals with conditions that are to be laid down by the Court of Appeal when conditional leave is being granted and is concerned, inter alia, with the time for the settling of the Record.

6 There is a clear distinction between Rules 3 and 4. Rule 3 is concerned with the application for initiating process in the Court of Appeal for admitting the application to the Privy Council; whereas the other Rule, namely Rule 4, deals, among other things, with the fixing of time for the settling of the Record.

7 In the case of applications under Rule 3, this Court has no jurisdiction to extend the time to appeal to Privy Council, whereas under Rule 4 taken in conjunction with Rule 5(b), a single Judge or the Count of Appeal may enlarge the time for settling the Record.

8 This Court may do so after conditional leave is granted, but for some good reason the Record had not been settled within the time fixed.

9 If the...