Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A British court acting as the final court of appeal for Mauritius ruled on Monday that the 2019 election of Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth was invalid, upholding an appeal by an opposition ...
A British court sitting as the final court of appeal for Mauritius on Monday upheld the 2019 election to parliament of Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth, rejecting an appeal by an opposition ...
The Supreme Court of Mauritius is the highest court of Mauritius and the final court of appeal in the Mauritian judicial system. It was established in its current form in 1850, replacing the Cour d'Appel established in 1808 during the French administration [1] and has a permanent seat in Port Louis.
The Constitution of Mauritius is the supreme legal document of the country. The final appeal from decisions of the Court of Appeal of Mauritius to the Judicial Committee of the Privy council in London as provided for under the Constitution of Mauritius. [1] [2] As of 2014, a total of 8,594 cases were pending before the Supreme Court of Mauritius.
It was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Mauritius in October 2023. [4] Laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, [5] and a more welcoming and accepting society relative to other African nations have cemented Mauritius as one of "Africa's most LGBT-friendly countries". [6]
He returned to his homeland Mauritius where he practised law as a barrister. Then in 1962 he started working at the Attorney General's office and eventually was promoted to the position of Parliamentary Counsel. At the age of 44 in 1976 and following his father's footsteps he became a Supreme Court judge. In 1982 he became Senior Puisne Judge.
Previously, Section 250(1) of the Mauritius Criminal Code of 1838 held that "Any person who is guilty of the crime of sodomy ... shall be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding 5 years." [6] Under the Supreme Court's 2023 judgement, the section should "re read so as to exclude such consensual acts from [its] ambit." [7]
Following the Award, both parties applied to the Supreme Court of Mauritius: Betamax to enforce the Award; STC to set aside the Award for several reasons, including that the Award conflicted with the public policy of Mauritius. The Supreme Court agreed with STC and set aside the Award as it held that the contract was made in breach of the PP ...