Welcome to the new SeyLII website. Enjoy an improved search engine and new collections. If you are used to accessing SeyLII via Google, note Google will take some time to re-index the site. We are still busy migrating some of the old content. If you need anything in particular from the old website, it will be available for a while longer at https://old.seylii.org/ |
Yvette Vidot v Johnna Ally (SCA 34 of 2010) [2012] SCCA 22 (31 August 2012);
JUDGMENT
MACGREGOR, P.,
This is a case between two ladies who were friends before they fell out because one was having a relationship with the husband of the other, and as a result of the consequent animosity between them, one assaulted the other in a church at Anse Royale, where both were to attend mass.
The issue here is one of quantum of damages for the assault and whether provocation as a result of the adulterous relation of the Plaintiff now Appellant with the assaulter’s husband, was material in mitigating the damages.
The authorities tend to show as in David vs. Joubert (1984) SLR, that although provocation is recognized as a fact, it is not material to negate or minimize damages claimed.
For the time being that case stands as persuasive authority on provocation, but it may be an area that merits review in future cases.
Otherwise we consider the damages to be on the low side considering that assault happened in a church , in front of a lot of people including the parish priest who knew the Appellant. She has felt embarrassed and shy to go to that church again.
We note in the case of David (supra) that the assault caused considerable physical injury and was out of anger or provocation as claimed; that the victim was having a relationship with the assaulter’s wife, and that he openly boasted about it saying he would do it as much as he liked. That was in 1984, and the victim of the assault was awarded only SR2,000 as moral damages.
Accordingly we hold the award warrants an increase for the physical injury from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.5,000/-, and for moral damages an increase from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.5,000/- making a total of Rs.10,000/- due in damages by the Respondent to Appellant.
We so hold and the appeal is allowed with costs.
…………………………………
F. MACGREGOR PRESIDENT
I concur: ……………………………….
M. TWOMEY
JUSTICE OF APPEAL
I concur: ………………………………
J MSOFFE
JUSTICE OF APPEAL
Dated this 31st August 20120, Victoria, Seychelles
.