All Courts
Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
All Jurisdictions
Appellate
Civil
Commercial
Criminal
Divorce
Probate
Winding-Up
All Judges
Alexandra Wheatley
Attride-Stirling
Auld
Auld, R
Baker
Bell
Bernard
Brightman
Christopher
Clarke
Collett J in Wittich v Twaddle (1979) Civil Jurisdiction No. 117). Ground CJ applied a conversion rate of two dollars to the pound. This rate was not based solely on the actual exchange rate of the two currencies or an average over a period of time; but took into account what was perceived then as "the marked difference" in the cost of living between Bermuda and the UK. As this rule is routinely followed and was not disputed, I do not intend to depart from it. I would only comment that it seems to me to be a rule of practice rather than of law and might be ripe for review. The award for general damages comes to $13,000.
Cratonia Thompson
Delroy Duncan
Diel
Domingues
Duncan
Elkinson
Elkinson JP, Assistant Justice
English Supreme Court in Pitt v Holt.
Evans
Gloster
Greaves
Ground
Hargun
Hellman
Hellman J in Williams-v- Bermuda Hospitals
Hellman J on this issue) that the usual rule is that an
Hoffman:
Hon. Ian Kawaley
House in the Imperial Tobacco case is that it was based on the
House of Lords.
Ian Kawaley Justice Of Appeal
Ian R. C. Kawaley
Information Commissioner to issue
Jomari Gooden4 (who was of previous good character
Juan
Juan P. Wolffe JP
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Smith-v-R [2004] LRC
July 14, 2015 (“Decision 1”) dismissing BEST’s
July 14, 2015 dismissing BEST’s appeal against
July 4, 2005 set aside and the Defendant’s
June 13, 2018.
Kawaley
Kay
Kenlyn Swan
Kessaram
King’s
Land
Land Valuation Appeal Tribunal. The appeal is in respect of a property known
Learned
Learned Magistrate dealing with the good character issue.
Life Imprisonment
Mann J in Fulham Leisure Holdings Limited-v- Nicholson Graham &
Martin
Martin J and Consequential Orders and Directions
Martin J ex tempore
Master Lunn of the South
May 15, 2009. I also set out my provisional views on
Meerabux J in Gill v
Megarry J in Erinford Properties Ltd.-v- Cheshire County
Mr. Mark Pettingill, Assistant Puisne Judge
Mussenden
Narinder K Hargun
Nazareth
Nicholas Strauss QC in Countrywide
Nicole Stoneham
Nourse L.J. in In re Elgindata Ltd. (No 2) [1992] 1 WLR 1207, 1213-14:
Nourse LJ, where he said this:
Obergefell Et Al v Hodges 576 U.S.
Openshaw J in
PSC to abort the recruitment process was ultra vires and void - Public Service Commission
Parliamentary Registrar to designate
Parole Board To Refuse
Patrick Doherty, Assistant Justice
Permanent Police Tribunal to the effect that what is known
Pettingill
Premier to hold referendum on same sex
Privy
Privy Council in Collymore v
Privy Council in Fairfield Sentry Ltd v Migani & Ors [2014]
Privy Council in Jeyaretnam-v-Goh Chok Tong
Privy Council, stated in
Proffessional Conduct
Public Service Commission not to dismiss
Registrar, Ms Alexandra Wheatley
Registrar, Ms Charlene Scott, which was
Respondent (“the
Respondent (“the Minister”) dismissing BEST’s appeal against
Respondent (“the Minister”) dismissing BEST’s appeal against four
Respondent dated December
Respondent was incorrect and accordingly find for the
Respondent, the
Richards
Richards J:
Rihiiluoma
Riihiluoma
Roger Ormrod at
Rt. Hon. Justice Zacca
Saul Froomkin OBE, K.C.
Secretary of State or a Governor or a Lieutenant-
Segal
September 20, 2016, I described the primary broad function of JPLs
September 2013 given against the Defendant on the basis
Shade Subair Williams in Michael Cooke Kuczkiewicz v. HG (Bermuda) Ltd [2018] SC (Bda) 26 Com (19 March 2018) where the Learned Judge, when considering the construction of company bye-laws, set out the principles and in turn referred to the earlier Bermuda Judgment of Mr. Justice Hellman in Kingate Global Fund Limited (In Liquidation) v. Kingate Management Ltd. [2015] Bda LR 86 and the references which he made in that Judgment in respect of the construction of a contract. Mr. Justice Hellman quoted Lord Neuberger in the case of Arnold v. Britton and others [2015] UKSC 36. When giving the Judgment of the Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, at paragraph 19, sought to emphasise seven factors to take into account in the interpretation of contractual provisions. I set out the first four which are relevant here.
Simmons
Simmons AJ (as she
Smellie
Smith AJ in Cates and Panchaud v Dill [1956]
Southey
Stoneham
Subair Williams
Subair Williams (Registrar)
Taylor
Telecommunications Commission (“the Commission”). BCV contends that the
Telford Georges JA where he stated (at
Trial Judge affirmed. Costs of Appeal to be the respondent('s) to be taxed if not agreed. Costs to be paid by the Executors of John's estate."
Trustees to compromise the litigation?’ ”
Trustees, which was supported by
Wade-Miller
Wade-Miller J dated 12 March 2014, in which she dealt with applications on behalf of the Appellant, the petitioner in the original matrimonial proceedings, to whom I shall refer as "the Wife", and the Respondent, the respondent in those proceedings, to whom I shall refer as "the Husband". As appears from the heading of this judgment, the Wife appeared in person, both before the judge and on this appeal, and the Husband was represented by counsel. There were originally two applications before the judge; on 7 March 2013 the Husband had made an application for lump sum provision, while on 18 March 2013 the Wife had made application for relief in a number of respects, although for the purposes of this appeal they can be divided between her application for lump sum provision and transfer of property, on the one hand, and maintenance for the children, on the other. In relation to this latter, the emphasis was primarily on the children's school fees, and the proportions in which these should be divided between the parties. The Wife had filed two affidavits, and the Husband one, and both parties gave oral evidence.
Ward
Ward CJ dated 5 December 2001, in which
Wheatley
Wheatley (Registrar)
Windeyer
Wolffe
Worshipful Leopold Mills, Acting
Zacca
Zacca, E.
Zacca.
Zacca. President
a Board of Enquiry. The
a Board of Inquiry (‘the Board’) appointed by the
a court of summary jurisdiction shall lie as of right, and an
a magistrate in Juvenile Court who on a point in limine
a regulatory authority, Appeal involving questions of pure law or
a regulatory body-whether costs should follow
a single judge who is
acting Director of
administrative
an Acting Justice on the basis of an
any particular
arbitral tribunal was inconsistent with and was rendered in violation of Brazilian public policy. That application was dismissed on 20 June 2013, but this dismissal was in turn reversed by the Court of Appeals of the State of Sao Paulo, on 23 August 2013. The effect of that reversal was to remit the request for annulment to the lower court, and this process has yet to be completed. The judge commented (paragraph 26) that he had no information as to when the lower court was to hear the Annulment Application, and that he had no doubt that the unsuccessful party would wish to pursue an appeal.
at least 5 years was required.
between five to eight years. Thus applying the totality principle it is considered that a
both the Bermuda Monetary Authority
chair of the police disciplinary panel to refuse an adjournment of the disciplinary hearing
corrective training imposed for an indeterminate period for various
corrective training – Appellant 18 years old at time of
dismissal of the informations as against both appellants be
four months' imprisonment is manifestly inadequate. He points out that the maximum penalty for theft is 10 years' imprisonment and for money laundering 20 years' imprisonment. It has been said before, and I repeat it, that offences directed at the financial integrity of Bermuda, of which money laundering is one, are particularly serious and require deterrent sentences.
immediate imprisonment, being 6 months on
imprisonment
imprisonment and reducing the disqualification from 18 to 12 months. We now give our reasons.
imprisonment for a serious drug-related offence and is the subject of a
imprisonment should have been suspended
imprisonment, which comprised a basic
imprisonment.
insanity. This
judicial economy and fairness, the Court acceded to that submission and directed that both the Appeal and the civil claim made for arrears of rent were to come on for hearing at the same time.
learned Magistrate
of Companies, Registration of
on or about June 19, 2014
one year consecutive to the sentence being served by the
probation imposed by the learned Senior Magistrate
quoted passage is essentially the
same date, I ruled that “the answer to the
that date:
this Court dated 14 February 2023. The issues are: (i) the scope of the privilege arising from the Court's finding that hostile litigation against Jardine Strategic Holdings Limited (the "Company") in the form of section 106 proceedings was indeed in contemplation by the time the Transaction Committee was established on 19 February 2021; (ii) a stay pending appeal; (iii) the Court's inspection of the redacted documents; (iv) the "essence" of the request issue; and (v) the costs of these applications.
this Court dated 25th September 2015 (“the Judgment on the Preliminary
this Court dated 26 September 2022. Ms. Pedro appeared in person and the
this Court dated December 15, 2011 concluded as follows:
this Court has been appealed.
this Court in Mermaid Beach and Racquet
this Court is that this ground of appeal fails.
this Court which was binding on it, because there was no clear statutory jurisdiction to supervise the affairs of a vulnerable adult in the same manner as the Family Court could plainly oversee the welfare of a child.
this court dated 31 March 2015, and the Court’s order dated 12 April 2015.
this paragraph.
three years
to (a) disallow its
trustees to sell a trust asset-
two years corrective
two years’ imprisonment in June 2010 and
was erroneous in its treatment of the submissions which were advanced before him. The Appellant's success before us was on a basis not pursued in the Supreme Court. Ms Grant submits that it had been referred to in the Amended Statement of Claim but it is plain that it was not relied upon by counsel who represented the Appellant at the hearing before the Chief Justice. His submissions were correctly rejected and have not been repeated before us.
All Types
Approved Judgment
Approved Ruling
Circular
Decision
Ex Tempore Judgment
Ex Tempore Ruling
Judgment
Reasons For Decision
Reasons For Judgment
Reasons For Ruling
Ruling
Ruling On Costs
Ruling On Sentence
Sanction of a Scheme
Scheme Sanction
Sentence