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/

Court name
Supreme Court
Case number
MA 161 of 2021
Counsel for plantiff
F. Elizabeth

Marengo v Gamatis (MA 161 of 2021) [2022] SCSC 206 (11 March 2022);

Media neutral citation
[2022] SCSC 206
Counsel for defendant
D. Cesar
Govinden CJ

Govinden CJ
The case of Gill & Ors vs Film Ansalt (SCA 28 of 2009) (2013) SCCA 11 (03 May 2013) is authority for the principle that the Supreme Court can dismiss a Plaint at any time during the course of its proceedings for non-appearances of the parties, subject to it being reinstated on the cause list on good grounds shown.
I have read the motion for reinstatement filed by learned counsel for the Plaintiff and its supporting affidavit and the Reply of counsel for the Defendant.  Having done so I am of the view that the said motion must be sustained.  The case is not characterized by a lack of diligence, a chronic failure to secure the attendance of witnesses and counsel, scant regard to law, procedure and propriety and an abusive use of court process.  The Plaintiff and her counsel has been not guilty of laches.  He made a genuine mistake for the 1st time albeit that this court properly dismissed the Plaint.  Furthermore, I note that even the Defendant and his counsel was absent on the ill-fated dated of the 5th November at 9am.  Accordingly, I will use my discretion to reinstate the Plaint and the matter shall proceed from there and we will fix a new hearing date.
Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on day ……… of March 2022
Govinden CJ