Security for Costs

On 2 August 2017, the Industrial Court of Mauritius (Industrial Court) awarded a historic amount of MUR 100,000 [± USD 3,000] as security of costs. This decision is significant in three respects. Firstly, it highlights the readiness of the Industrial Court to adjust to the changed Mauritian employment landscape which now accommodates an increasing number of foreign employees at all levels of an enterprise and uphold their statutory employment rights or under Mauritius law generally. Secondly, against this landscape, this decision reflects a conscious effort by the Industrial Court to balance the equally important right of employers to be guarded against the risks of what may turn out to be non-meritorious employment claims. Finally, the amount awarded is the first of its kind as it is the first time that such an amount has been awarded by the Industrial Court.

Appleby appeared for ATSL and was represented by Sharmilla Bhima (Partner) and Dushyant Ramdhur (Partner).

MALLETIER L V V TEJOO A B 2017 SCJ 339

Security for Costs

On 23 October 2017, the Supreme Court of Mauritius (Supreme Court) reiterated two Mauritius law principles in relation to the question of security for costs. Firstly, security for costs was only triggered only when a foreigner was a claimant to a contentious matter, not a defendant in proceedings. Secondly, it had to be raised as a point of law (i.e. in limine litis). This therefore meant that, as a matter of procedure, it could not be raised after the completion of the exchange of pleadings. In the present matter, the Supreme Court set aside the application for security for costs that was raised in a counterclaim inasmuch as the foreign party was a defendant to the counterclaim action and the application for security for costs was lodged after the close of pleadings.

Locations

Mauritius

Services

Dispute Resolution

Type

Insight

Share
Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
11 Jul 2024

Our Environment Our Responsibility

The judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) in the matter of Eco-Sud and two ...

14 May 2024

What are the tools to aid the arbitral process to combat the undesirable effects of parallel litigation?

The fundamental aspect of arbitration as an alternative dispute mechanism is that despite parties’...

29 Apr 2024

Appleby Mauritius Quarter One Newsletter 2024

As we navigate through this dynamic year, Appleby's first Mauritius newsletter of 2024 sees our team...

29 Apr 2024

Receivership: an enforcement mechanism for lenders

In a world of business, unforeseen circumstances can often arise that lead a company to financial di...

29 Apr 2024

The JCPC reaffirmed the exception to the bank secrecy rule

Further to the oral judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) on 06 July 2023 a...

26 Apr 2024

Regulation of Moneylending in Mauritius

Moneylending is a crucial credit device in the world of financial services which plays a significant...

26 Apr 2024

Katra Holdings Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank (Mauritius) Ltd [2024] UKPC 8 - case summary

The Privy Council set aside an appeal challenging a winding up order of a Mauritian company, Katra H...

26 Apr 2024

Statutory Demands - a Review of Recent Decisions

INSOLVENCY - The bankruptcy division of Mauritian Supreme Court re-affirms the test to determine the...

26 Apr 2024

Directors' Duties in the face of insolvency

The duties of directors in relation to companies in Mauritius are laid out under the Companies Act 2...

16 Apr 2024

Absence of assets in Mauritius – not a bar to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment

On 12 April 2024, the Mauritian Supreme Court confirmed in Hobler v Harker 2024 SCJ 159, that an app...