MAURITIUS Law and Practice Contributed by: André Robert and Ammar Oozeer, BLC Robert & Associates
• a wrong has been carried out, or arguably carried out, by an ultimate wrongdoer; • there is a need for an order to enable an action to be brought against the ultimate wrongdoer; and • the person against whom the order is sought must: (a) be mixed up in the matter so as to have facili- tated the wrongdoing; and (b) likely be able to provide the information neces- sary to enable the wrongdoer to be sued.
er orders and anti-suit injunctions. Given that these types of orders are equitable remedies, Mauritian courts tend to follow English law principles governing such orders. Common Interim Remedies The most common types of interim remedies granted are prohibitory orders, provisional attachment orders and Mareva injunctions aimed at preserving the sta- tus quo ante and/or to preserve assets pending the determination of a main case. Prohibitory orders Prohibitory orders are usually granted where: • there is a serious issue to be tried; • damages would not be an adequate remedy; and • the balance of convenience lies in favour of grant- ing the interim injunction. Mareva injunctions Mareva injunctions are granted where: • the applicant has a good arguable claim; • the respondent owns assets in Mauritius and there is a real risk of dissipation of assets; and • it is just and convenient to grant the order. Provisional attachments orders Provisional attachment orders temporarily freeze a debtor’s assets held by a third party to secure a credi- tor’s claim. This is a conservatory measure under the Code de Procédure Civile , granted when there is a well-founded debt and risk of asset dissipation. Interim injunctions An applicant for an interim injunction has to comply with certain undertakings, namely: • to make full and frank disclosure of material facts at the time of making the application; • to enter a main case within a reasonable time; and • to give an undertaking in damages should it later turn out that the injunction was wrongly granted. A judge in chambers may discharge an interim injunc- tion if one or more of the above undertakings are not complied with.
5.3 Discovery in This Jurisdiction See 5.1 Discovery and Civil Cases .
5.4 Alternatives to Discovery Mechanisms Each party that intends to rely on documents in sup- port of its claim or defence must communicate those documents to the other parties prior to the trial at the stage of exchanges of pleadings. Each document then has to be produced by witnesses called by the party in court. 5.5 Legal Privilege Both legal advice privilege and litigation privilege are recognised in Mauritian law. There are not many cases which have considered all the nuances surrounding legal professional privilege. It is likely that Mauritian courts will opt to follow the principles set out in English case law. 5.6 Rules Disallowing Disclosure of a Document Disclosure may be refused as an exception to the general rule, where a matter is protected by a statute as confidential or an official secret. Disclosure may still be made in circumstances made permissible by a statute or by order of the judge. 6. Injunctive Relief 6.1 Circumstances of Injunctive Relief The judge in chambers of the Supreme Court has broad powers to issue injunctions, to subsequent- ly vary the order made, discharge the order or set it aside. The judge in chambers may issue different types of injunctions including prohibitory injunctions, mandatory injunctions, Mareva injunctions, Anton Pill-
691 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook