Skerrette v Attorney General

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Judge: Best, J.
• Judgment Date: 16 March 2001
• Neutral Citation: TT 2001 HC 45
• Docket Number: H.C.A. No. Cv. 2004 of 1999
• Court: High Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Date: 16 March 2001

High Court

Best, J.

H.C.A. No. Cv. 2004 of 1999

Skerrette

and

Attorney General

Appearances:

Mr. Jairam, S.C. and Mr. Scotland for the applicant.

Mr. M. Julian for the respondent.

Costs - Assessment — Consent order in action — No provisions for applicant's cost — Whether costs should be awarded fit for senior and junior counsel — Rate of interest to be awarded on costs — Employment of senior counsel found to be luxury that should not fall upon respondent — Costs awarded fit for junior counsel at 6% interest.

Best, J.

1 On 23rd November 2000, a consent order, which effectively brought this matter to an end, was entered herein. However, that order did not make provision for the applicant's costs.

2 The parties herein are ad idem that the applicant is entitled to his costs; their dispute relates to the rate of interest to be awarded on his costs and whether he should be awarded his costs fit for Senior and Junior Counsel.

3 The Supreme Court of Judicature Act. Chap. 4:01 at section 25 states, inter alia,

“In any proceedings tried in any court of record for recovery of any debt or damages, the court may, if it thinks fit, order that there shall be included in the sum for which judgment is given interest at such rate as it thinks fit on the whole or part of the debt or damages far the whole or any part of the period between the date when the cause at action arose and the date of the judgment…”

By The Supreme Court of Judicature (Amendment) Act, 2000 the principal Act was amended by inserting a new section 25A after section 25, to wit, “Every judgment debt entered up carries interest at the rate of twelve per centum per annum from the time of entering up the judgment, until the same shall be satisfied…”

4 In the matter of Ramnarine Jorsinsh v. The Attorney General (1998) 52 W.I.R. 501, at page 510, the Chief Justice stated:

I see no reason why the statutory jurisdiction to award damages (see section 25 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act) should not extend to damages far breach of a constitutional right…) would award interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum …from the date of the notice to the date of this judgment.”

5 In the fight of the foregoing, it is the view of this Court and I so hold that the applicant herein be awarded interest on his judgment at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the 16th September 1909 (the date of his Notice of Motion) to 23rd November 2000 (the date of his...