MAURITIUS Law and Practice Contributed by: Sivakumaren (Robin) Mardemootoo, Natasha Behary Paray and Jeeshna (Kaajal) Radhakissoon, Dentons Mauritius LLP
obtained for the client in the context of negotiations, award or a judgment. For attorneys, the relevant ethical rules require that any contingency fee arrangement constitute a reason- able commission and be agreed in writing, which in practice is generally understood to amount to 10% of the value of the claim. 5.4 Insurance Litigation insurance appears to be permissible under Mauritian law and is available, though not offered by all insurance providers. For the most part, insurance coverage for litigation appears to fall under liability policies. Its use, however, remains limited in practice. No specific information is available regarding insur- ance coverage for arbitration and ADR proceedings. 5.5 Costs Costs are typically addressed following a final deci- sion, with the general rule being that the losing party bears the winning party’s costs. However, the court retains discretion to make a different or no order as to costs in appropriate circumstances. Recoverable costs generally cover legal adviser fees, court filing costs, witness attendance costs, and costs of ancillary pretrial applications. In practice, however, the fees of legal advisers and experts are capped at prescribed amounts under the Legal Fees and Costs Rules, which tend to be modest. As a result, a winning party is rarely able to fully recover the actual costs incurred in litigation. However, this limitation does not apply in all contexts. In matters successfully appealed to the Judicial Com- mittee of the Privy Council, and in international arbitra- tion proceedings, the Legal Fees and Costs Rules do not apply. International arbitration costs are instead governed by the Supreme Court (International Arbitra- tion Claims) Rules 2013, which allow a winning party to recover costs closer to its actual expenditure, on either a standard or indemnity basis. Beyond ordinary costs, a party may also seek wasted costs and adjournment costs arising from the conduct of the opposing party or their legal advisers.
Wasted costs may be sought directly against the legal advisers of the other party as indemnity for improper, unreasonable or negligent acts or omissions that have caused additional costs to be incurred. Adjournment costs may be sought by any party at any stage of civil proceedings to compensate for costs arising from undue delay caused by repeated post- ponements, provided the adverse party had applied for and been granted the relevant adjournment. Both wasted costs and adjournment costs are equally sub- ject to the caps prescribed by the relevant court rules. 5.6 Assessment of Costs The general rule is that costs follow the event, mean- ing the costs of the successful party are borne by the losing party. However, this is subject to the require- ment that the successful party makes an express demand for costs in its pleadings. Notwithstanding the general rule, the court retains a wide discretion in awarding costs and may refuse to award costs. The court will typically exercise its dis- cretion to refuse costs where the prevailing party has improperly conducted its case, where a defendant’s counterclaim has succeeded or where the parties have negotiated a settlement. In determining whether to award adjournment costs, the court will consider, in the exercise of its discretion, whether the applicant has incurred additional expens- es as a direct result of repeated postponements of the trial. In determining whether to award wasted costs, the court will assess whether there has been an improper, unreasonable or negligent act or omission on the part of a party’s legal representative, and whether it is just, in all the circumstances, to make such an order.
6. Interim Remedies 6.1 Availability of Interim Relief See 2.6 Interim Relief .
The Supreme Court may grant interim relief both in the exercise of its equitable jurisdiction and pursuant to
350 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook