On 24 July 2020, the Supreme Court (Commercial Division) of Mauritius delivered a judgment non-suiting Sheeny Worldwide Limited (Sheeny) for failing to establish its claim in the sum of USD 7.1 million whilst the documentary evidence adduced by Sheeny found in the Court records was glaring and blatant, the moreso, the claim remained unrebutted and uncontested by Aerospace Finance (Asia) Limited (Aerospace) which remained default.
The learned Judge at first instance, Honourable Justice Jugessur-Manna, concluded that it was “merely a claim and in the absence of the Aerospace irrevocably accepting such claim, Sheeny cannot assume that the claim is due and demandable.” Furthermore, the learned Judge found that “the mere production of various agreements between Sheeny and Aerospace is not enough to establish the claim for commission” – which on the other hand was the thrust of Sheeny's claim. It was the Court's view that Sheeny was required to produce documentary evidence witnessing the sale in line with the terms of the agreements, hence warranting the commission.
Sheeny appealed to the Court of Civil Appeal. The Appellant was ordered by the Honourable Chief Justice to publish the ten grounds of appeal in two daily newspapers on the 29 August 2020. At the hearing of the matter before the Court of Civil Appeal on the 6 June 2022, the Court of Civil Appeal presided by the Senior Puisne Judge Honourable N. Devat and Honourable Justice K. D. Gunesh-Balaghee gave an oral judgment in the course of the same day of the hearing of the appeal which lasted twenty minutes only. The Court of Civil Appeal held that the “learned Judge's assessment of the evidence before her, is erroneous”.
The Court of Civil Appeal further found that “there was ample evidence adduced before her by the Appellant's representative, in particular the documentary evidence, from which she could have safely found that the claim of USD 7.1 million had been made out, the moreso as that evidence has remained unrebutted and unchallenged.”
Sheeny's appeal was therefore allowed and the judgment of the Supreme Court (Commercial Division) was quashed and substituted for a judgment ordering Aerospace to pay to Sheeny the sum of USD 7.1 million, together with interest and the costs before the trial court and before the Court of Civil Appeal.
Appleby represented the Appellant, Sheeny Worldwide Limited, as Attorney.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.