Felix Deroche et al v Plumbing Design & Installation Limited et al

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SVGHCV2017/0070 BETWEEN: FELIX DEROCHE CLAIMANT AND MARC RICHARDSON AND AXIS LTD AND PLUMBING DESIGN & INSTALLATION LIMITED DEFENDANTS/ ANCILLARY CLAIMANTS AND ANDRE DEROCHE FOURTH DEFENDANT/ ANCILLARY DEFENDANT AND ANDRE DEROCHE SECOND ANCILLARY CLAIMANT AND FELIX DEROCHE SECONDARY ANCILLARY DEFENDANT Appearances: Mr. Stanley John Q.C. with Mr. Akin John for the Claimant/First Ancillary Defendant Mr. Jonathan Lewis for the First, Second and Third Defendants/First Ancillary Claimant Mr. Joseph Delves for the Second Ancillary Defendant and Fourth Defendant/Second Ancillary Claimant 2019: June4 • ADDENDUM TO JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON THE 4rn JUNE 2019 Byer, J.:

[1]On the delivery of this decision on 4 June 2019, upon the court making inquiry of counsel for the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants as to his submission of his closing address in this matter, the court was informed that the same had in fact been filed on 25 March 2019.

[2]Subsequent to the delivery of judgment and only upon the court's request, the submissions of the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants were provided to the court. I therefore issue this addendum to my judgment having considered the same.

[3]In my mind these closing submissions do not raise any new issues of law that have not already been dealt with in the substantive judgment.

[4]The substance of the submissions made, accord with the determination of the court with regard to the legal position of the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants.

[5]However, in light of the submissions made by counsel, I now amend my finding with regard to costs and in particular paragraph 3 of my substantive judgment1 and award the First and Second defendants costs to be paid by the claimant pursuant to Part 65.5 CPR 2000 on the basis of an unvalued claim. This is in keeping with the finding of the court that the First and Second defendants were never in occupation of the subject Property and that the claimant was therefore not entitled to damages for trespass2.

[6]The finding in relation to the Third defendanUancillary claimant remains intact with regard to the order of costs.

Nicola Byer

HIGH COURT JUDGE

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SVGHCV2017/0070 BETWEEN: FELIX DEROCHE CLAIMANT AND MARC RICHARDSON AND AXIS LTD AND PLUMBING DESIGN & INSTALLATION LIMITED DEFENDANTS/ ANCILLARY CLAIMANTS AND ANDRE DEROCHE FOURTH DEFENDANT/ ANCILLARY DEFENDANT AND ANDRE DEROCHE SECOND ANCILLARY CLAIMANT AND FELIX DEROCHE SECONDARY ANCILLARY DEFENDANT Appearances: Mr. Stanley John Q.C. with Mr. Akin John for the ClaimanUFirst Ancillary Defendant Mr. Jonathan Lewis for the First, Second and Third Defendants/First Ancillary Claimant Mr. Joseph Delves for the Second Ancillary Defendant and Fourth DefendanUSecond Ancillary Claimant 2019: June 4 .. ADDENDUM TO JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON THE 4TH JUNE 2019 Byer, J.:

[1]On the delivery of this decision on 4 June 2019, upon the court making inquiry of counsel for the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants as to his submission of his closing address in this matter, the court was informed that the same had in fact been filed on 25 March 2019.

[2]Subsequent to the delivery of judgment and only upon the court’s request, the submissions of the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants were provided to the court. I therefore issue this addendum to my judgment having considered the same.

[3]In my mind these closing submissions do not raise any new issues of law that have not already been dealt with in the substantive judgment.

[4]The substance of the submissions made, accord with the determination of the court with regard to the legal position of the First, Second and Third defendants/ancillary claimants.

[5]However, in light of the submissions made by counsel, I now amend my finding with regard to costs and in particular paragraph 3 of my substantive judgment1 and award the First and Second defendants costs to be paid by the claimant pursuant to Part 65.5 CPR 2000 on the basis of an unvalued claim. This is in keeping with the finding of the court that the First and Second defendants were never in occupation of the subject Property and that the claimant was therefore not entitled to damages for trespass2.

[6]The finding in relation to the Third defendant/ancillary claimant remains intact with regard to the order of costs. Nicola Byer HIGH COURT JUDGE 1Order of the court under Heading “As To The Issue Of Costs” 2 Paragraph 87 of the judgment delivered on 4 June 2019