Rules of the Supreme Court 1985

Download PDF
Year1985
CategoryConsolidated
Last Updated2026-02-19 16:15:51
File Size1496.6 KB
Sourcebermudalaws.bm
Table of Contents

QU OF NT AT A FE RU

BERMUDA

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

GN 470 / 1985

[made under section 62 of the Supreme Court Act 1905 and brought into operation on 4 January 1988]

WHEREAS an action is now pending in the Supreme Court of Bermuda in which [blank] is plaintiff and [blank] is defendant and in which the plaintiff claims [blank] AND WHEREAS it has been represented to the said Court that it is necessary for the purposes of justice and for the due determination of the matters in dispute between the parties that the following persons should be examined as witnesses upon oath touching such matters, namely [blank] of [blank] and [blank] of [blank] and it appears that such witnesses are resident within your jurisdiction. NOW I [blank] the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Bermuda, hereby request that for the reasons aforesaid and for the assistance of the said Court you will be pleased to summon the said witnesses (and such other witnesses as the agents of the said plaintiff and defendant shall humbly request you in writing so to summon) to attend at such time and place as you shall appoint before you, or such other person as according to your procedure is competent to take the examination of witnesses, and that you will cause such witnesses to be examined viva voce (or upon the interrogatories which accompany this letter of request) touching the said matters in question in the presence of the agents of the plaintiff and defendant or such of them as shall, on due notice given, attend the examination. And I further request that you will permit the agents of both the plaintiff and defendant or such of them as shall be present to examine (upon interrogatories and viva voce upon the subject-matter thereof or arising out of the answers thereto) such witnesses as may, after due notice in writing, be produced on their behalf, and the other party to cross-examine the said witnesses (upon cross-interrogatories and viva voce) and the party producing the witness for examination to re-examine him viva voce. And I further request that you will be pleased to cause the evidence of the said witnesses (or the answers of the said witnesses and all additional viva voce questions, whether on examination, cross-examination or re-examination) to be reduced into writing and all books, letters, papers and documents produced on such examination to be duly marked for identification, and that you will be further pleased to authenticate such examination by the seal of your tribunal or in such other way as is in accordance with your procedure and to return it together with (the interrogatories and cross- interrogatories and) a note of the charges and expenses payable in respect of the execution of this request through the British Consul from whom the same was received (or [blank] one of Her Majesty’s Secretaries of State) for transmission to the Supreme Court of Bermuda. And I further request that you will cause me, or the agents of the parties if appointed, to be informed of the date and place where the examination is to take place.

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 36 Summons for appointment of examiner to take evidence of witness out of jurisdiction (O.39, r.2) (Heading as in cause or matter) Let all parties (as in No. 31) on the hearing of an application on the part of [blank] for an order that (the British Consul at [blank] in (name of country) or his deputy) ([blank] Esq.) be appointed as special examiner for the purpose of taking the examination, cross- examination, and re-examination, viva voce, on oath or affirmation, of [blank] and [blank], witnesses on behalf of the [blank] at [blank] in (name of country) on the usual terms and that the costs of and incidental to this application and the said examination be costs in the cause. Dated, etc. (conclude as in No. 31). No. 37 Order for appointment of examiner to take evidence of witness out of jurisdiction (O.39, r.2) (Heading as in cause or matter) On hearing the attorneys on both sides and on reading the affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] It is ordered that the British Consul or his deputy at [blank] (or [blank] Esq.) be appointed as special examiner for the purpose of taking the examination, cross-ex- amination and re-examination viva voce, on oath or affirmation, of [blank] witnesses on the part of [blank] at [blank] in (name of country). The examiner shall be at liberty to invite the attendance of the witnesses and the production of documents, but shall not exercise any compulsory powers. Otherwise such examination shall be taken in accordance with the English procedure. The [blank] attorneys to give to the [blank] attorneys [blank] days’ notice in writing of the date on which they propose to send out this order to [blank] for execution, and that [blank] days after the service of such notice the attorneys for the plaintiff and defendant respectively do exchange the names of their agents at [blank] to whom notice relating to the examination of the said witnesses may be sent. And that [blank] days (exclusive of Sunday) before the examination of any witness hereunder notice of such examination shall be given by the agent of the party on whose behalf such witness is to be examined to the agent of the other party, unless such notice be dispensed with. And that the depositions when taken, together with any documents referred to therein, or certified copies of such documents, or of extracts therefrom, be sent by the examiner, under seal, to the Registrar of the Supreme Court in Hamilton, Bermuda, on or before the [blank] day of [blank] next, or such further or other day as may be ordered, there to be filed in the proper office. And that either party be at liberty to read and give such depositions in evidence on the trial of this action, saving all just

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

exceptions. And that the trial of this action be stayed until the filing of such depositions. And that the costs of and incidental to the application for this order and such examination be costs in the cause. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 38 Notice of Motion (O.8, r. 3) (Heading as in cause or matter) Take notice that (pursuant to the leave of [blank] given on the [blank] day of [blank]

19 [blank]) the Court (or Mr Justice [blank]) will be moved [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] at [blank] o’clock, or so soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, by (Mr [blank] of [blank]) attorney for the above-named plaintiff (or defendant) that [blank] and that the costs of the application be [blank] Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] of [blank] Attorney for [blank]

To Attorney for [blank] No. 39 Default judgment in action for liquidated demand (O.13, r.1; O.19, r.2; O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No appearance having been entered (or no defence having been served) by the defendant herein, it is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed). (The above costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the Registrar’s certificate dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]). No. 40 Default judgment in action for unliquidated damages (O.13, r.2; O.19, r.3; O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

No appearance having been entered (or no defence having been served) by the defendant herein, it is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff damages to be assessed. The amount found due to the plaintiff under this judgment having been certified at $ [blank] as appears by the (Judge’s or Registrar’s certificate or as may be) filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] It is adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and costs to be taxed. The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39)

(Note—This form is a combined form of interlocutory and final judgment. The plaintiff may at his option enter interlocutory judgment by omitting the words below the line in the form and enter a separate final judgment in Form No. 43.) No. 41 Default judgment in action relating to detention of goods (O.13, r.3; O.19, r.4; O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No appearance having been entered (or no defence having been served) by the defendant herein. It is this day adjudged that the defendant do deliver to the plaintiff the goods described in the writ of summons (or statement of claim) as (description of goods) or pay the plaintiff the value of the said goods to be assessed (and also damages for their detention to be assessed). or It is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff the value of the goods described in the writ of summons (or statement of claim) to be assessed (and also damages for their detention to be assessed). The value of the said goods having been assessed at $ [blank](and damages at $ [blank]) as appears by the (Judge’s or Registrar’s certificate or as may be) filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] It is adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and costs to be taxed. The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39) (Note—See the note to No. 40) No. 42 Default judgment in action for possession of land (O.13, r.4; O.19, r.5; O.42, r.1)

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

(Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No appearance having been entered (or no defence having been served) by the defendant herein, it is this day adjudged that the defendant do give the plaintiff possession of the land described in the writ of summons (or statement of claim) as [blank] and pay the plaintiff $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed). The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39). No. 43 Final judgment after assessment of damages, etc. (O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] The plaintiff having on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] obtained interlocutory judgment herein against the defendant for damages (or as may be) to be assessed, and the amount found due to the plaintiff having been certified at $ [blank] as appears by the (Judge’s or Registrar’s certificate or as may be) filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] It is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and costs to be taxed. The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39) No. 44 Judgment under Order 14 (O.14, r.3; O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] The defendant having entered appearance herein and the Court having under Order 14, rule 3 ordered that judgment as hereinafter provided be entered for the plaintiff against the defendant. It is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed) or pay the plaintiff damages to be assessed and costs to be taxed or deliver to the plaintiff the goods described in the writ of summons (or statement of claim) as [blank] (or pay the plaintiff the value of the said goods to be assessed) (and also damages for their detention to be assessed) and costs to be taxed

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

or give the plaintiff possession of the land described in the writ of summons (or statement of claim) as [blank] and costs to be taxed. The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39). No. 45 Judgment after trial before judge without jury (O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) Dated and entered the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] This action having been tried before the Honourable Mr Justice [blank] without a jury, at the Supreme Court Bermuda, and the said Mr Justice [blank] having on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordered that judgment as hereinafter provided be entered for the plaintiff (or defendant) (and directed that execution be stayed for the period and on the terms hereinafter provided). It is adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and his costs of action to be taxed (or that the plaintiff do pay the defendant his costs of defence to be taxed or as may be according to the judge’s order). (It is further adjudged that execution be stayed for [blank] days and if within that time the [blank] gives notice of appeal and sets down the appeal, execution be further stayed until the determination of the appeal or as may be according to the judge’s direction). The above costs etc. (as in No. 39). No. 46 Judgment after trial before judge with jury (O.42, r.1) (Heading as in action) Dated and entered the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] This action having been tried before the Honourable Mr Justice [blank] with a jury and the jury having found (state findings) and the said Mr Justice [blank] having on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordered that judgment as hereinafter provided be entered for (etc. as in No. 45). No. 47 [blank] No. 48 Judgment after decision of preliminary issue

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

(O.33, r.7; O.42, r.1) (Heading as in cause or matter) Dated and entered the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] The issue (or question) arising in this cause (or matter) by the order dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordered to be tried before [blank] having on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] been tried before the said [blank] and the said [blank] having found [blank] and having ordered that judgment as hereinafter provided be entered for the [blank] (or having dismissed the cause or matter). It is adjudged that (the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and his costs of action to be taxed) (the plaintiff do pay the defendant his cost of defence to be taxed) or as may be according to the order made. No. 49 Judgment for liquidated sum against estate representative (O.42, r. 1) (Heading as in action) Dated and entered the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Recital as in No. 39, 43-48 according to the circumstances in which judgment was obtained). It is adjudged that the defendant as executor (or administrator) of the above named [blank] deceased do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] and costs to be taxed, the said sum and costs to be levied of the real and personal estate of the deceased at the time of his death come to the hands of the defendant as such executor (or administrator) to be administered, if he has or shall hereafter have so much thereof in his hands to be administered, and if he has not so much thereof in his hands to be administered, then, as to the costs aforesaid, to be levied of the goods, chattels and other property of the defendant authorized by law to be seized in execution (or as may be according to the order made). The above costs, etc. (as in No. 39). No. 50 Judgment for defendant’s costs on discontinuance (O.62, r.10(1)) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]. The plaintiff having by a notice in writing dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] discontinued this action (or withdrawn his claim in this action for [blank]) and the defendant’s costs of the action (or of the claim withdrawn) having been taxed and allowed

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

at $ [blank] as appears by the Registrar’s certificate dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] and the plaintiff not having paid the sum within four days after taxation. It is this day adjudged that the plaintiff do pay the defendant $[blank] the said taxed costs. No. 51 Judgment for costs after acceptance of money paid into court (O.62, r.10(2), (3)) (Heading as in action) The [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] The defendant having paid into court in this action the sum of $[blank] in satisfaction of the plaintiff’s cause(s) of action (or in satisfaction of the plaintiff’s cause of action for [blank]), and the plaintiff having by his notice dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] accepted that sum in satisfaction of his cause(s) of action (or in satisfaction of his cause of action for [blank] and abandoned his other cause(s) of action), and the plaintiff’s costs herein having been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the Registrar’s certificate dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] and the defendant not having paid the sum within forty-eight hours after taxation. It is this day adjudged that the defendant do pay the plaintiff $ [blank] the said taxed costs. No. 52 Notice of judgment or order (O.44, r.3) (Heading as in cause or matter) Take notice that a judgment (or order) of this Court was given (or made) on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] by which it was (state substance of judgment or order). And also take notice that from the time of the service of this notice you (or the infant [blank] or the patient [blank] as may be) will be bound by the said judgment (or order) to the same extent as you (or he) would have been if you (or he) had originally been made a party. And also take notice that without entering an appearance you (or the said infant or patient) may within one month after the service of this notice apply to the Court to discharge, vary or add to the said judgment (or order) and that after entering an appearance at the Registry of the Supreme Court you (or the said infant or patient) may attend the proceedings under the said judgment (or order). Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] To [blank] (Signed) [blank]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

No. 53 Writ of fieri facias (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. do pay the plaintiff A.B. $ [blank] (and $ [blank] costs or costs to be taxed, which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the certificate of the Registrar dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]): We command you that of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution you cause to be made the sums of $ [blank] and $ [blank] for costs of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment (together with Provost Marshal General’s fees, costs of levying and all other legal, incidental expenses) and that immediately after execution of this writ you pay A.B. in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) the amount levied in respect of the said sums and interest. [And we further command you that, in case you shall not be able to find sufficient property of the said defendant, or the said defendant shall fail to point out to you any property whereon to levy, you do forthwith arrest the said defendant and deliver him into the custody of the Commissioner of Prisons to be kept in a prison as a prisoner for debt for the period of [blank] unless he shall be sooner discharged from the said imprisonment in due course of law.] And we also command you that you indorse on this writ immediately after execution thereof a statement of the manner in which you have executed it and send a copy of the statement to A.B. And the court has fixed support and maintenance allowance at the rate of [blank] a day Witness [blank] Chief Justice of Bermuda, the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] This writ was issued by [blank] of [blank] attorney for [blank] the [blank] (or this writ was issued by A.B. (the plaintiff) in person who resides at [blank]).

N.B. The words in square brackets are only to be included on the express instructions of the party applying for the writ of fieri facias to issue. No. 54 Writ of fieri facias on order for costs

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

(O.45, r.12) (Heading as in cause or matter) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named cause (or matter) it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordered that the [blank] C.D. do pay the [blank] A.B. costs to be taxed, which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the Registrar’s certificate dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]: We command you that of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution you cause to be made the sum of $ [blank] and $ [blank] for cause of execution, and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment together with Provost Marshal General’s fees, cost of levying and all other legal incidental expenses and that immediately after execution of this writ you pay A.B. in pursuance of the said order the amount levied in respect of the said sum and interest. And we also (as in No. 53). And we further (as in No. 53). And the court (as in No. 53). Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 55 [blank] No. 56 Writ of fieri facias after levy of part (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas (as in No. 53). And whereas by our writ issued the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] we commanded you that of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. you should cause to be made the sums of $ [blank] and [blank] for costs of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment and should pay A.B. in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) the amount levied in respect of the said sums and interest and should indorse on the writ

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

a statement of the manner in which you had executed it and send a copy of the statement to A.B. And whereas the indorsement on the said writ states that by virtue thereof you caused to be made of the property aforesaid the sum of $ [blank] We command you that of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution you cause to be made the sum of $ [blank] the residue of the said $ [blank] and $ [blank] for costs of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment (continue as in No. 53). And we also (as in No. 53). And we further (as in No. 53). And the court (as in No. 53). Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 57 Writ of fieri facias against estate representative (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. an executor (or administrator) of E.F. deceased do pay the plaintiff A.B. $ [blank] and $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the certificate of the Registrar dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]), the said sums and interest to be levied of the real and personal estate of the said E.F. at the time of his death in the hands of the defendant C.D. as his executor (or administrator) to be administered, if he had or should thereafter have so much thereof in his hands to be administered, (and if he had not, then the said costs to be levied of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of the defendant C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution): We command you that of the real and personal estate of E.F. deceased, at the time of his death, which is in the hands of C.D. as his executor (or administrator) to be administered you cause to be made the sums of $ [blank] and $ [blank] for costs of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment (together with Provost Marshal General’s fees, cost of levying and all other legal incidental expenses) (and if the said C.D. has not so much thereof in his hands to be administered that you cause to be made of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution the sum of $ [blank] for costs) and that immediately after execution of

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

this writ you pay A.B. in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) the amount levied in respect of the said sums and interest. And we also command you (remainder as in No. 53) Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). Nos. 58 to 63 [blank] No. 64 Writ of delivery: delivery of goods, damages and costs (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. do deliver to the plaintiff A.B. the following goods, namely (describe the goods delivery of which has been adjudged or ordered) (and $ [blank] damages) and $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed, which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the certificate of the Registrar dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]): We command you that you cause the said goods to be delivered to A.B. and that of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution you cause to be made the sums of $ [blank] and $ [blank] for costs of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment together with Provost Marshal General’s fees, cost of levying and all other legal incidental expenses and that immediately after execution of this writ you pay A.B. in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) the amount levied in respect of the said sums and interest. And we also command you that you indorse (remainder as in No. 53). Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 65 Writ of delivery: delivery of goods or value, damages, costs (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53).

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. do deliver to the plaintiff A.B. the following goods, namely (describe the goods delivery of which has been adjudged or ordered) or do pay him $ [blank] being the assessed value of the said goods, (and $ [blank] damages) and $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed, which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the certificate of the Registrar dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]). We command you that you cause the said goods to be delivered to A.B. and that if possession of the said goods cannot be obtained by you you cause to be made of the goods, chattels, lands, houses and other property of C.D. authorized by law to be seized in execution $ [blank] the assessed value of the said goods and pay it to A.B. And we also command you that of the said property of C.D. you cause to be made the sums of $ [blank] for (damages and) costs and $ [blank] for cost of execution and also interest on $ [blank] at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment together with Provost Marshal General’s fees, cost of levying and all other legal incidental expenses and that immediately after execution of this writ you pay A.B. in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) the amount levied in respect of the said sums and interest. And we also command you that you indorse (remainder as in No. 53). Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 66 Writ of possession (O.45, r.12) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. do give the plaintiff A.B. possession of [describe the land delivery of which has been adjudged or ordered] and do pay him ($ [blank] and) $ [blank] costs (or costs to be taxed, which costs have been taxed and allowed at $ [blank] as appears by the Registrar’s certificate dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]): We command you that you enter the said land and cause A.B. to have possession of it. And we also command you that of the goods, chattels, land, houses and other property (remainder as in No. 53). And we also command you that you indorse (as in No. 53).

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 67 Writ of sequestration (O.45, r. 12) [Heading as in cause or matter] ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To: (names of not less than four commissioners) greeting: Whereas in the above named action (or matter) in our Supreme Court of Bermuda it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that C.D. should (pay into court the sum of $ [blank] or as may be): Know ye, therefore, that we, in confidence of your prudence and fidelity, do by this writ authorize and command you, or any two or three of you, to enter upon and take possession of all the real and personal estate of the said C.D. and to collect, receive and get into your hands the rents and profits of his real estate and all his personal estate and keep the same under sequestration in your hands until the said C.D. shall (pay into court to the credit of the said action or matter the sum of $ [blank] or as may be) and clear his contempt and our said Court make other order to the contrary. Witness (as in No. 53). This writ was issued (as in No. 53). No. 68 Writ of restitution (O.46, r. 1) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas in the above named action it was on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] adjudged (or ordered) that the defendant C.D. do give the plaintiff A.B. possession of (describe the land delivery of which was adjudged or ordered): And whereas on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] a writ of possession was issued pursuant to the said judgment (or order) directing you to give possession of the said land to the said A.B., but it appearing to our Supreme Court that certain other persons have wrongfully taken possession of the said land and our said Court having on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordered that a writ of restitution should issue in respect of the said land:

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

We command you that you enter the said land and cause A.B. to have restitution thereof. And we also command you that you indorse (remainder as in No. 53). Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 69 Writ of assistance (O.46, r. 1) (Heading as in action) ELIZABETH THE SECOND (as in No. 53). To the present and any future Provost Marshal General [blank] greeting: Whereas by an order dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] made in an action in the Supreme Court between A.B., plaintiff, and C.D., defendant, the said C.D. was ordered to give to the said A.B. possession of the land (or goods) therein described, namely [describe the land or goods], but he the said C.D. and other persons have refused to obey the order and keep the possession of the land (or goods) in contempt of us and our said Court: And whereas by an order made in the said action dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] it was ordered that a writ of assistance should issue to give the said A.B. possession of the said land (or goods): We command you that you [enter the said land and eject the said C.D., his tenants, servants and accomplices, each and every of them, from the said land and every part thereof and put the said A.B. and his assigns into full, peaceable and quiet possession thereof] (or put the said A.B. and his assigns into full peaceable and quiet possession of the said goods) and defend and keep him and his assigns in such peaceable and quiet possession, when and as often as any interruption thereof is at any time effected, according to the intent of the said orders. And herein you are not in any wise to fail. Witness (as in No. 53). This writ (as in No. 53). No. 70 [blank] No. 71 Notice of renewal of writ of execution (O.46, r.8) [Heading as in cause or matter]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Take notice that the writ of [blank] issued in this cause [or matter] directed to the Provost Marshal General and bearing date the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] has by order dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] been renewed for one year beginning with the date of the said order.

To the Provost Marshal General (Signed) [blank] Attorney for [blank] No. 72 Garnishee order to show cause (O.49, r.1) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BERMUDA

19..........., No. ..........

(Mr Justice [blank] Judge in chambers)

Between A.B. ................................................. Judgment creditor and C.D. ................................................. Judgment debtor F.G. ................................................. Garnishee Upon reading the affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]: It is ordered by [Mr Justice [blank]] that all debts due or accruing due from the above-mentioned garnishee to the above-mentioned judgment debtor [in the sum of $ [blank]] be attached to answer a judgment recovered against the said judgment debtor by the above-named judgment creditor in the Supreme Court on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]; (or to answer an order made in the Supreme Court on the [blank] day of [blank]

19 [blank] ordering payment by the said judgment debtor to the above-named judgment creditor of the sum of $ [blank] [debt and $ [blank] costs] [together with the costs of the garnishee proceedings) on which judgment [or order] the sum of $ [blank] remains due and unpaid. And it is ordered that the said garnishee attend Mr Justice [blank] in Chambers, at the Supreme Court in Hamilton, Bermuda on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] at [blank] o’clock, on an application by the said judgment creditor that the garnishee do pay to the said judgment creditor the debt due from the said garnishee to the said judgment debtor, or so much thereof as may be sufficient to satisfy the said judgment (or order), together with the costs of the garnishee proceedings. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]

To the above-named garnishee and judgment debtor. No. 73

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Garnishee order absolute where garnishee owes less than judgment debt (O.49, rr.1,4) [Heading as in No. 72] Upon hearing the attorneys for the judgment creditor and the garnishee, and upon reading the affidavit of [blank] filed herein, and the order to show cause made herein dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] whereby it was ordered that all debts due or accruing due from the above-named garnishee to the above-named judgment debtor should be attached to answer a judgment recovered against the said judgment debtor by the above-named judgment creditor in the Supreme Court on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] for the sum (or to answer an order made in the Supreme Court dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] ordering payment by the said judgment debtor to the above- named judgment creditor of the sum) of $ [blank] (debt and $ [blank] costs) (together with the costs of the garnishee proceedings) on which judgment (or order) the sum of $ [blank] remained due and unpaid: It is ordered that the said garnishee do forthwith pay to the said judgment creditor $ [blank] being so much of the debt from the said garnishee to the said judgment debtor as is sufficient to satisfy the said judgment debt and costs, together with $ [blank] the costs of the garnishee proceedings, and that the said garnishee be at liberty to retain $ [blank] for his costs of this application out of the balance of the debt due from him to the judgment debtor. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 74 Garnishee order absolute where garnishee owes less than judgment debt (O.49, rr.1,4) [Heading as in No. 72] Upon hearing (as in No. 73). It is ordered that the said garnishee (after deducting therefrom $ [blank] for his costs of this application) do forthwith pay to the said judgment creditor $ [blank] the debt due from the said garnishee to the said judgment debtor. And that the sum of $ [blank] the costs or the judgment creditor of this application be added to the judgment debt and be retained out of the money recovered by the said judgment creditor under this order and in priority to the amount of the judgment debt. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] Nos. 75 to 81 [blank] No. 82 Summons for appointment of receiver (O.51, r.3)

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

[Heading as in action] Let the defendant C.D. attend the (Judge in chambers, at the Supreme Court in Hamilton, Bermuda) on [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] at [blank] o’clock on the hearing of an application on the part of the plaintiff for an order that a receiver be appointed (or that P.R. be appointed receiver) in this action to receive the rents, profits and moneys receivable in respect of the interest of the defendant C.D. in the following property, namely (describe the property) in or towards satisfaction of the moneys and interest due to the plaintiff under the judgment (or order) in this action dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] and for an order as to the costs of this application. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] This summons was taken out by [blank] of [blank] To the above named [blank] (and his attorney). No. 83 Order directing summons for appointment of receiver and granting injunction meanwhile (O.51, r.3) [Heading as in action]

Upon reading the affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank]: Let the defendant C.D. attend the (Judge in chambers, at the Supreme Court of Justice in Hamilton, Bermuda on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] at [blank] o’clock on the hearing of an application on the part of the plaintiff for the appointment of P.R. as receiver in this action, on the usual terms, to receive the rents, profits and moneys receivable in respect of the said defendant’s interest in the following property, namely (describe the property) in or towards satisfaction of the sum of $ [blank] debt and $ [blank] costs, and interest on the said sums at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] due under the judgment (or order) in this action dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] And the plaintiff (by his attorney) hereby undertaking to abide by any order the Court may hereafter make should it decide that the said defendant has sustained damage by reason of this order and is entitled to damages which the plaintiff ought to pay, it is ordered that the said defendant by himself, his agents or servants, or otherwise, be restrained, and an injunction is hereby granted restraining him, until after the hearing of the above application, from assigning, charging or otherwise dealing with the said property. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 84 Order appointing receiver by way of equitable execution (O.51)

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

[Heading as in action] Upon hearing [blank] and upon reading the affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (If security ordered) It is ordered that P.R. of [blank] on first giving security to the satisfaction of the Court, be and is hereby appointed to receive the rents, profits and moneys receivable in respect of the above-named defendant’s interest in the following property, namely (describe the property). (If no security ordered and receiver is not the plaintiff) The plaintiff being answerable for the acts and defaults of the receiver, it is ordered that P.R. of [blank] be and is hereby appointed to receive (continue as above) but he shall not receive more than the amount of the judgment debt and allowed costs of obtaining this order without leave of the Court or first giving (at the plaintiff’s cost unless otherwise ordered) the usual security to the satisfaction of the Registrar. (If no security ordered and receiver is the plaintiff: as above omitting “The plaintiff being answerable for the acts and defaults of the receiver” and the words after “the Court”). (In all cases continue as follows): That this appointment shall be without prejudice to the rights of any prior incumbrancers upon the said property who may think proper to take possession of or receive the same by virtue of their respective securities or, if any prior incumbrancer is in possession, then without prejudice to such possession. And that the tenants of premises comprised in the said property do attorn and pay their rents in arrear and growing rents to the receiver. And that the receiver have liberty, if he shall think proper (but not otherwise), out of the rents, profits and moneys to be received by him to keep down the interest upon the prior incumbrances, according to their priorities, and be allowed such payments, if any, in passing his accounts. And that the receiver shall on the [blank] day of [blank] (three months after the date of order), and at such further and other times as may be ordered by the Court leave and pass his accounts, and shall on the [blank] day of [blank] (four months after the date of order) and at such further and other times as may be hereafter ordered by the Court pay the balance or balances appearing due on the accounts so left, or such part thereof as shall be certified as proper to be so paid, such sums to be paid in or towards satisfaction of what shall for the time being be due in respect of the judgment signed on the [blank] day of [blank] for the sum of $ [blank] debt and $ [blank] costs, making together the sum of $ [blank] And that the costs of the receiver (including his remuneration), the costs of obtaining his appointment, of completing his security (if any), of passing his accounts and of obtaining his discharge shall not exceed ten per cent of the amount due under the said judgment or the amount recovered by the receiver, whichever is the less, provided that not less than [blank] be allowed unless otherwise ordered. Such costs shall be taxed unless assessed by the Court and shall be primarily payable out of the sums received by

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

the receiver, but if there shall be no sums received or the amount shall be insufficient, then upon the certificate of the Court being given stating the amount of the deficiency, such certificate to be given after passing the final account, the amount of the deficiency so certified shall be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. It is also ordered that the balance (if any) remaining in the hands of the receiver, after making the several payments aforesaid, shall unless otherwise directed by the Court forthwith be paid by the receiver into court to the credit of this action, subject to further order. And that any of the parties be at liberty to apply to the judge in chambers as there may be occasion. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 85 Order of committal (O.52) [Heading as in action] Upon motion this day made unto this Court by the attorney for the plaintiff and upon reading (an affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] of service on the defendant C.D. of a copy of the order of the Court dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] and of notice by this motion): And it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the defendant C.D. has been guilty of contempt of court in [state the contempt]: It is ordered that for his said contempt the defendant do stand committed to [blank] Prison to be there imprisoned [until further order]. (It is further ordered that this order shall not be executed if the defendant C.D. complies with the following terms, namely, [blank]). Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] No. 86 Notice of motion for judicial review (O.53, r.5) [Royal Arms] In the Supreme Court of Bermuda Civil Jurisdiction In the matter of an application for judicial review and In the matter of [blank]

Take Notice that pursuant to the leave of a Judge of the Supreme Court [or the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank] given on [blank] the Court will be moved as soon as

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

counsel can be heard on the applicant’s behalf for an order for relief in the terms, and on the grounds, set out in Form 86A, herewith.

And that the costs of and occasioned by this motion be [blank]

And take notice that on the hearing of this motion the applicant will use the affidavit and exhibits copies of which accompany this notice.

[And also take notice that the Supreme Court [or the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank] by order dated [blank] directed that all proceedings in [or on] the said [blank] be stayed until after the hearing of this motion or further order]. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank]. (Signed) of To Attorney for Attorney for IMPORTANT

Any respondent who intends to use an affidavit at the hearing should inform the Registry of his intention within ten days of the service of this notice. Any such affidavit must be filed in the Registry as soon as practicable and in any event within fifty-six days of service.

[Form 86 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 86A In the Supreme Court of Bermuda [Royal Arms]

Applicant’s Ref. No Notice of APPLICATION for leave Supreme Court Ref. to apply for Judicial Review No. (O.53, r.5)

This form must be read together with Notes for Guidance obtainable from the Registry. To the Registrar of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Registry, Hamilton, HM 12 Name, address and description of applicant (s)

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Judgment, order, decision or other proceeding in respect of which relief is sought Relief Sought Name and address of applicant’s attorneys, or, if no attorneys acting, the address for service of the applicant Signed Dated (Second page) GROUNDS ON WHICH RELIEF IS SOUGHT (If there has been any delay, include reasons here) Note – Grounds must be supported by an affidavit which verifies the facts relied on.

[Form 86A inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 86B (O.53, r.3 (5)) In the Supreme Court of Bermuda

Applicant’s RefNotice of RENEWAL of Supreme Court No. application for leave to apply for Ref. No. Judicial Review To the Registrar of the Supreme Court Supreme Court Registry, Hamilton, HM 12 The applicant intends to renew his application for leave to apply for Judicial Review.

Signed: Date: Received in the NOTE: This notice must be lodged in the Registry Registry within 10 days of the service on the applicant or his solicitor of notice that the original application for leave has been refused.

[Form 86B inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 87 Notice of motion for writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum (O.54, r.2) [Royal Arms]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

In the Supreme Court of Bermuda

Criminal Jurisdiction [or Civil Jurisdiction as the case may be]

20 . No.

In the Matter of A.B.

and

In the Matter of an application for a writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum

Take notice that pursuant to the direction of the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank] [or the Supreme Court], the Supreme Court will be moved on the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank],, or so soon thereafter as counsel can be heard on behalf of A.B. for an order that the writ of habeas corpus do issue directed court at such time as the Court or judge may direct upon the grounds set out in the affidavits of the said A.B. and [blank] and the exhibits therein respectively referred to used on the application to the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank] [or the Supreme Court] for such order, copies of which affidavits and exhibits are served herewith.

And that the costs of and occasioned by this motion be the applicant’s to be taxed and paid by the respondents to the applicant.

And take notice that on the hearing of this motion the said A.B. will use the affidavits for himself and the said [blank] and the exhibits therein referred to.

Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank].

(Signed)

of

Attorney for To Attorney for

[Form 87 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 88 Notice directed by Court of adjourned application for writ of habeas corpus (O.54, r.2) [Heading as in No. 2]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Take notice that an application for the above writ was made to the Supreme Court [or to the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank] ] in the above matter on the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank, when the said application was adjourned so that notice could be given to you. Notice is hereby given to you that the said application will be made to the Supreme Court [or the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank]] on [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank] at [blank] o’clock. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank] . (Signed) of Attorney for To Attorney for

[Form 88 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 89 Writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum (O.54, r.10) ELIZABETH THE SECOND [as in No. 53] To the Commissioner of Prisons greeting: We command you that you have in the Supreme Court [or before a judge in chambers] at Hamilton, on the day and at the time specified in the notice served with this writ, the body of A.B. being taken and detained under your custody as is said, together with the day and cause of his being taken and detained, by whatsoever name he may be called therein, that Our Court [or Judge] may then and there examine and determine whether such cause is legal, and have you there then this writ. Witness [blank] Chief Justice of Bermuda the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank]. Indorsement By order of court [or of Mr. Justice [blank]] This writ was issued by [blank] of [blank] attorney for [blank].

[Form 89 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 90 Notice to be served with writ habeas corpus ad subjiciendum (O.54, r.6) In the Supreme Court of Bermuda Criminal Jurisdiction [or Civil Jurisdiction as the case may be]. [If in a cause already begun, here insert the title, not otherwise]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Whereas this court [or the Honourable Mr. Justice [blank]] has granted a writ of habeas corpus directed to [blank] [or other person having the custody of [blank]if so] commanding him to have the body of A.B. before the said Court [or before a judge in chambers] at the Supreme Court, Hamilton, on the day and at the time specified in the notice together with the day and cause of his being taken and detained. Take notice that you are required by the said writ to have the body of the said A.B. before this court [or before the judge aforesaid] on [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 20 [blank] at [blank] o’clock and to make a return to the said writ. In default the said Court will then, or so soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, be moved to commit you to prison for you contempt in not obeying the said writ [or if in vacation application will then be made to one of the judges of the said Court for a warrant for your arrest in order that you may be held to bail to answer for your contempt in not obeying the said writ]. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 20 [blank (Signed) of Attorney for To Attorney for

[Form 90 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 91 Writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum (O.54, r.10) ELIZABETH THE SECOND [as in No. 53] To the Commissioner of Prisons at [blank] greeting: We command you that you have before the Supreme Court on [blank] the [blank] day [blank] of [blank] 20[blank], at [blank] the body of [blank], being committed and detained in Our prison under your custody, as is said, then and there to testify the truth and give evidence [on Our behalf against A.B. for (describe the offence) or otherwise describing the proceedings], and so from day to day until the said [blank] shall have given his evidence as aforesaid. And when he shall have given his evidence, then you take him back without delay to Our said prison under your custody and cause him to be detained therein under safe custody, until he shall be from thence discharged by due course of law. Witness [as in No. 4] Indorsement By order of court [or of Mr. Justice [blank]]. This writ was issued [blank] of [blank] attorney for [blank]

[Form 91 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

No. 92 Writ of habeas corpus ad respondendum (O.54, r.10) ELIZABETH THE SECOND [as in No. 53] To the Commissioner of Prisons at [blank] greeting: We command you that you have before the Supreme Court on [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank], at [blank] the body of[blank], being committed and detained in Our prison under your custody, as is said, together with the day and cause of his being taken and detained, by whatsoever name he may be called, then and there to answer to a charge of [blank] to be then and there made against him, and so from day to day until he shall have answered the said charge, and to be dealt with according to law. And have you then and there this writ. Witness [as in No. 4] Indorsement [As in No. 6]

[Form 92 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 94 Order for production of documents in marine insurance action (O.72, r.10) [Heading as in action] Upon hearing [blank] [and upon reading the affidavit of [blank] filed the [blank] day of [blank]19 [blank]]: It is ordered that the plaintiff and all other persons interested in this action, and in the insurance the subject of this action, do produce and show to the defendant, his solicitors or agents on oath [or by oath of their proper officer] all insurance slips, policies, letters of instruction or other orders for effecting such slips or policies, or relating to the insurance or the subject-matter of the insurance on the ship [blank], or the cargo on board thereof, or the freight thereby, and also all documents relating to the sailing or alleged loss of the said ship, cargo or freight, and all correspondence with any person relating in any manner to the effecting of the insurance on the said ship, cargo or freight, or any other insurance whatsoever effected on the said ship, cargo or freight, on the voyage insured by the policy sued on in this action, or any other policy whatsoever effected on the said ship, or the cargo on board thereof, or the freight thereby on the same voyage. Also all correspondence between the captain or agent of the ship and any other person with the owner or any person before the commencement of or during the voyage on which the alleged loss happened. Also all books and documents, whatever their nature and whether originals, duplicates or copies, which in any way relate or refer to any matter in question in this action and which are now in the custody, possession or power of the plaintiff or any other person on his behalf, his or their, or any of their brokers, solicitors or agents, with liberty for the defendant, his solicitors or agents to inspect and take copies of, or extracts from, any of those books or documents. And that in the like manner the plaintiff

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

and every other person interested as aforesaid do account for all other books and documents relating or referring to any matter in question in this action which were once but are not now in his custody, possession and power. And that [in the meantime all further proceedings be stayed and that] the costs of and occasioned by this application be costs in the action. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 20[blank].

[Form 94 inserted by BR55/2005 effective 1 January 2006] No. 95 Certificate of order against the Crown (O.77, r.15(3)) [Heading as in cause or matter] By a judgment [or order] of this Court dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] it was adjudged [or ordered] that [give particulars of the judgment or order].

I hereby certify that the amount payable to [blank] by [blank] in pursuance of the said judgment (or order) is $ [blank] (together with interest thereon at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum until payment and together with costs which have been taxed and certified by the Registrar at $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank]

19 [blank] until payment).

(This certificate does not include the amount payable under the said judgment or order in respect of costs). Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank]

(Note—The final paragraph is to be included where a separate certificate with respect to costs has been directed to be issued). No. 96 Certificate of order for costs against the Crown (O.77, r.15) [Heading as in cause or matter] By a judgment (or order) of this Court dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] it was adjudged (or ordered) that [give particulars of the judgment or order]. I hereby certify that the costs payable to [blank] by [blank] in pursuance of the said judgment [or order] have been taxed and certified by the Registrar at $ [blank] (and interest is payable thereon at the rate of $ [blank] per cent per annum from the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] until payment).

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 97 Search Warrant Under Part IV of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1997 (O. 115B, r.16) CLAIM NO. of 20 IN THE SUPREME COURT IN THE MATTER OF THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1997 AND IN THE MATTER OF A CIVIL RECOVERY INVESTIGATION APPLICANT [insert name of police officer making application] PREMISES TO WHICH THIS WARRANT RELATES: [insert address] WARRANT TO ENTER PREMISES IN RESPECT OF A CIVIL RECOVERY INVESTIGATION AND EXERCISE POWERS UNDER SECTION 39 OF THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1997

To [insert name of person/organisation], who is believed to be the occupier of the premises described above (“the premises”) and to any person in charge of, or operating at or from, the premises:

You should read the terms of this warrant and the accompanying notice very carefully. You are advised to consult an attorney as soon as possible. If you intentionally obstruct or fail to comply with any requirement of a police officer exercising his or her powers under the warrant, you may be committing a contempt of court for which you may be imprisoned or fined.

An application was made on [insert date] by Counsel for the [insert appropriate officer] to The Honourable Mr/Mrs Justice [insert name] (“the Judge”) for a warrant under section

39 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1997 (“the Act”).

The Judge read the evidence in support of the application and was satisfied that the requirement for the issue of a warrant in section 39(2)(d) of the Act has been met. As a result of the application, this warrant in relation to the premises was issued by the Judge on [insert date].

1. This warrant is issued in respect of a civil recovery investigation by the [insert

appropriate officer] in relation to [indicate the property subject to the investigation] (“the investigation”).

2. RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

warrant [at any time] [insert any restriction on times or days of the week] and on producing the warrant—

(a) to enter and search the premises;

(b) to seize any material (other than items subject to legal privilege) found there which in his or her opinion is likely to be of substantial value (whether or not by itself) to the investigation;

(c) to photograph or make copies of any material seized;

(d) to retain material seized under the warrant in connection with the investigation.

3. In this warrant, the term “premises” includes any place and, in particular

includes—

(a) any vehicle, vessel, aircraft or offshore structure; and

(b) any tent or movable structure.

You are entitled to apply to the Court to vary or discharge this warrant. If you intend to make such an application, you must first inform the [insert appropriate officer] [person named in paragraph 2]. An application to stop the warrant from being executed must be made immediately upon it being served.

DATED this [ ] day of [ ] 20

____________________________________________________________ THE HONOURABLE MR./MRS JUSTICE [ ]

Nos. 98 to 109 [blank] [Appendix A Form No. 97 inserted by BR 98 / 2013 effective 20 November 2013]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

APPENDIX B

SPECIAL ADMIRALTY FORMS

No. 1 Writ of summons in action in rem (O.75, r.3)

19..........., Folio .......... IN THE SUPREME COURT Admiralty action in rem against: [The ship “X” or as may be describing the res] [The owners of the ship “Y” or as may be] Plaintiffs and [The owners of the ship “X” or as may be describing the res] Defendants ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith: To the [owners of and other] persons interested in the ship [blank] of the port of [blank] [or cargo, etc., as may be]. We command you that within 14 days after the service of this writ, inclusive of the day of service, you do cause an appearance to be entered for you in an action at the suit of [blank]: and take notice that in default of your so doing the plaintiff may proceed therein, and judgment may be given in your absence, and if the res described in this writ is then under arrest of the Court it may be sold by order of the Court. Witness [blank], Chief Justice of Bermuda, the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] Note—This writ may not be served more than twelve calendar months after the above date unless renewed by order of the Court. DIRECTIONS FOR ENTERING APPEARANCE The defendants may enter an appearance in person or by an attorney either (1) by handing in the appropriate forms duly completed, at the Registry, the Supreme Court, in Hamilton, Bermuda, or (2) by sending them to that office by post. Indorsements to be made on writ before issue Indorsement of claim The Plaintiff’s claim is for [blank] [If the plaintiffs sue, or the defendants are sued, in a representative capacity this must be stated in the indorsement of claim.]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Indorsement as to attorneys address This writ was issued by [blank] of [blank] attorney for the said plaintiffs whose address is [blank] (or This writ was issued by the said plaintiffs who reside at [blank] and [if the plaintiffs do not reside within the jurisdiction] whose address for service is [blank]. Indorsement as to service This writ was served by me at [blank] on [blank] on [blank] the [blank] day of [blank]

19 [blank] by [stating manner of service]. (Signed) [blank] (Address) [blank] No. 2 [blank] Writ of summons in Admiralty action in personam Note—Form 1, 3 or 5 in Appendix A, as is appropriate, should be used. No. 3 Warrant of arrest (O.75, r.5(1)) [Heading as in action] ELIZABETH THE SECOND, etc. (as in Form No. 1). To the Provost Marshal General, Greeting. We hereby command you to arrest the ship [blank] of the port of [and the cargo now or lately laden therein, together with the freight due for the transportation thereof] or [and the freight due for the transportation of the cargo now or lately laden therein], and to keep the same under safe arrest until you shall receive further orders from Us. Witness (as in Form No. 1). The plaintiff’s claim is for [copy from the writ] Taken out by [blank] [attorneys for] the [blank] Provost Marshal General’s indorsement as to service No. 4 Praecipe for warrant of arrest (O.75, r.5(4)) [Heading as in action]

We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] the plaintiffs request a warrant to arrest [description of property giving name, if a ship].

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 5 Praecipe for caveat against arrest (O.75, r.6) [Description of property giving name, if a ship]

We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for [blank] of [blank]] request a caveat against the arrest of [description of property giving name, if a ship] and hereby undertake to enter an appearance in any action that may be begun in the Supreme Court against the said [blank] and, within three days after receiving notice that such an action has been begun, to give bail in the action in a sum not exceeding [blank] dollars or to pay that sum into court. We consent that the writ of summons and any other document in the action may be left for us at [blank] Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 6 Praecipe for service of writ in rem by Provost Marshal General (O.75, r.8(3)) [Heading as in action]

We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] the plaintiffs request that the writ of summons left herewith be duly served on [blank] Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 7 Release (O.75, r.13(1)) [Heading as in action] ELIZABETH THE SECOND, etc. (as in Form No. 1) To the Provost Marshal General, Greeting. Whereas in this action We did command you to arrest the [blank] and to keep the same under safe arrest until you should receive further orders from Us. Now We do hereby command you to release the said [blank] from the arrest effected by virtue of Our warrant in this action.

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Witness (as in Form No.1) Taken out by [blank] [attorneys for] [blank] Provost Marshal General’s indorsement On [blank] the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] the [blank] was released from arrest pursuant to this Instrument. (Signed) [blank] Provost Marshal General No. 8 Praecipe for issue of release (O.75, r.13(6)) [Heading as in action]

We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] the plaintiffs [or defendants] in this action against [description of property giving name, if a ship], now under arrest by virtue of a warrant issued out of the Supreme Court, request the issue of a release with respect to the said [blank]. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 9 Praecipe for caveat against release and payment (O.75, r.14(1)) [Description of property giving name, if a ship] We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] [blank] of [blank] request a caveat against the issue of a release with respect to [description of property giving name, if a ship] now under arrest and, should the said property be sold by order of the Court, a caveat against payment out of court of the proceeds of sale. The intending caveator claims to have an interest [to the extent of approximately $ [blank] if known] in the above-mentioned property in respect of [state nature of claim, e.g. salvage, collision damage, etc.]. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 10 Praecipe for withdrawal of caveat (O.75, r.15(1)) [Description of property giving name, if a ship]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] [blank] of [blank] request that the caveat (state nature of caveat) entered on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] on behalf of [blank] be withdrawn. Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 11 Bail bond (O.75, r.16(1)) [Heading as in action] Whereas this Admiralty action in rem against the above-mentioned property is pending in the Supreme Court and the parties to the said action are the above-mentioned plaintiffs and defendants: NOW, THEREFORE, WE, A.B. of [blank] and C.D. of [blank] hereby jointly and severally submit ourselves to the jurisdiction of the said Court and consent that if they, the above-mentioned defendants, [or plaintiffs, in the case of a counterclaim] do not pay what may be adjudged against them in this action, with costs, or do not pay any sum due to be paid by them in consequence of any admission of liability therein or under any agreement by which this action is settled before judgment and which is filed in the said Court, execution may issue against us, our executors or administrators, goods and chattels, for the amount unpaid or an amount of [blank] dollars whichever is the less. (Signed) [blank] This bail bond was signed by the said A.B. and C.D., the sureties, the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] Before me [blank] A Commissioner for Oaths. No. 12 Praecipe for commission for appraisement and sale (O.75, r.23(1)) [Heading as in action] We [blank] of [blank] [attorneys for] the plaintiffs [or defendants] request a commission for the appraisement and sale of [description of property giving name, if a ship] which was ordered by the Court on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] Dated the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] (Signed) [blank] No. 13 Commission for Appraisement and Sale

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

(O.75, r.23(2)) [Heading as in action] ELIZABETH THE SECOND, etc. (as in Form No. 1). To the Provost Marshal General, Greeting. Whereas in this action the Court has ordered [description of property giving name, if a ship] to be appraised and sold. We hereby authorize and command you to choose one or more experienced persons and to swear him or them to appraise the said [blank] according to the true value thereof, and such value having been certified in writing by him or them to cause the said [blank] to be sold by (private treaty) (public auction) for the highest price that can be obtained for it, but not for less than the appraised value unless the Court on your application allows it to be sold for less. AND WE further command you, immediately upon the sale being completed, to pay the proceeds thereof into court and to file the certificate of appraisement signed by you and the appraiser or appraisers, and an account of the sale signed by you, together with this commission. Witness (as in Form No. 1). Taken out by [blank] [attorneys for] the [blank] No. 14 Release and Warrant of Possession (O.75) [Heading as in action] ELIZABETH THE SECOND, etc. (as in Form No.1) To the Provost Marshal General, Greeting: WHEREAS in this action the Court has ordered possession of the ship [name to be stated], her tackle, apparel and furniture to be delivered up to [blank] or to his attorney for his use [blank] We hereby command you to release the said ship, her tackle, apparel and furniture from the arrest made by virtue of Our warrant in that behalf and to deliver possession thereof to the said [blank] or to his attorney for his use. Witness [as in Form No.1] Taken out by [blank] [attorneys for] the [blank] Provost Marshal General’s Indorsement On the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] the ship [blank] was released from arrest pursuant to this warrant. (Signed) [blank]

RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT 1985

Provost Marshal General Receipt Received from the Provost Marshal General on the [blank] day of [blank] 19 [blank] the ship [blank] and everything on board belonging to her. (Signed) [blank] No. 15 [blank]

[Amended by: BR 3 / 1986 BR 7 / 1998 BR 61 / 1999 BR 81 / 1999 BR 41 / 2000 BR 86 / 2000 BR 55 / 2005 BR 98 / 2013 BR 10 / 2014

2017 : 9 BR 62 / 2018

2022 : 4 BR 10 / 2024 BR 4 / 2025]

Case Name Citation Date Court
Moulder v Hallet WilkinsonLtd [2026] SC (Bda) 21 civ. (25 February 2026) 2026-02-25 Supreme Court
The Resource Group International Limited v MUHAMMAD ZIAULLAH CHISHTI SARAH JANE POBERESKIN Application for writs of fiere facias and ancillary orders directing the transfer of shares to the receivers appointed by order of the court in aid of execution of the order permitting the applicant to enforce a certain arbitration award as a judgment of the Bermuda court dated 4 July 2025 under RSC Order 46 rule 7 REASONS FOR ORDERS [2026] SC (Bda) 22 civ. (25 February 2026) 2026-02-25 Supreme Court
Re A Settlement Established [2026] SC (Bda) 17 civ. (11 February 2026) 2026-02-11 Supreme Court
K Applicant/Mother v A Respondent/Father [2026] SC (Bda) 2 (16 January 2026) 2026-01-16 Supreme Court
David Lee Tucker v Hamilton Properties Limited [2025] SC (Bda) 133 civ. (22 December 2025) 2025-12-22 Supreme Court
Conyers Trust Company (Bermuda) Limited (As Trustee Of The First Trust) v THE PROTECTOR OF THE SECOND TRUST Application for relief under section 47A Trustee Act 1975 [2025] SC (Bda) 134 civ. (22 December 2025) 2025-12-22 Supreme Court
Jefferson Health Northeast System Abington Memorial Hospital v Cassatt Insurance Company, Ltd. Grand View Hospital [2025] SC (Bda) 107 Civ. (15 October 2025) 2025-10-15 Supreme Court
Wife v Husband [2025] SC (Bda) 91 div. (8 October 2025) 2025-10-08 Supreme Court
St. John’S Trust Company Limited v Medlands Limited The Attorney General Robert Theron Brockman Bermuda Trust Company Limited Hsbc Private Bank (C.I.) Limited Martin Lang Grosvenor Trust Company Limited Evatt Anthony Tamine Dorothy Kay Brockman [2025] SC (Bda) 99 Civ. (30 September 2025) 2025-09-30 Supreme Court
Wanda Booth Shaddi Somersall Empress Somersall v Hsbc Bank Bermuda Limited Marshall Diel & Myers Limited The Commissioner Of Police Amicus Law Chambers Limited [2025] SC (Bda) 103 civ (29 September 2025) 2025-09-29 Supreme Court
Re Afiniti Ltd (In Liquidation) [2025] SC (Bda) 97 civ (24 September 2025) 2025-09-24 Supreme Court
FOURWORLD GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND, LTD. FOURWORLD EVENT OPPORTUNITIES, LP (acting through its general partner FOURWORLD CAPITAL, LLC) FOURWORLD SPECIAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND, LLC FW DEEP VALUE OPPORTUNITIES FUND I, LLC CORBIN ERISA OPPORTUNITY FUND, LTD. Plaintiffs (No. 333) HARSPRING CAPITAL, LP (acting through its general partner HARSPRING CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC) Plaintiff (No. 334) v Enstar Group Limited [2025] SC (Bda) 76 civ. (4 August 25) 2025-08-04 Supreme Court
A v B COSTS RULING (Determination on the papers) [2025] SC (Bda) 68 app. (7 July 2025) 2025-07-07 Supreme Court
K Amani Lawrence Eugene Johnston v THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THE MINISTER OF THE CABINET OFFICE THE HEAD OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BERMUDA THE GOVERNOR OF BERMUDA NALINI SALICK SHAKIRA DILL-FRANCOIS Directly Affected [2025] CA (Bda) 14 Civ 2025-06-20 Court of Appeal
Burgess v First Bermuda Group [2025] SC (Bda) 46 civ. (8 May 2025) 2025-05-08 Supreme Court
Rev. Dr. Leonard Santucci v The Bermuda Union Of Teachers [2025] SC (Bda) 41 civ. (14 April 2025) 2025-04-14 Supreme Court
REEF ISAAC MIZRACHY (A MINOR) (through his parents and legal guardians Amir and Jennifer Marie Mizrachy) v Ministry Of Education [2025] CA (Bda) 7 Civ 2025-03-21 Court of Appeal
Paul Rodrigues Tereza Rodrigues v Wakefield Quin Limited John S. Bush Iii [2025] SC (Bda) 32 Civ. (20 March 2025) 2025-03-20 Supreme Court
CIVIL APPEAL No. 40 of 2022 LEYONI JUNOS v The Premier Of Bermuda Commission Of Inquiry Into Historic Losses Of Land In Bermuda [2025] CA (Bda) 4 Civ 2025-03-12 Court of Appeal
Re Chris Furbert Jr -And- Stevedoring Services Limited [2025] SC (Bda) 18 civ. (14 Feb 2025) 2025-02-14 Supreme Court
Gregory Edward Troy Burgess v FIRST BERMUDA GROUP LIMITED (A Subsidiary of Clarien Bank Limited) CLARIEN BANK LIMITED CANTERBURY LAW LIMITED CONYERS DILL AND PEARMAN LIMITED NARINDER KUMAR HARGUN First Defendant Second Defendant Third Defendant Fourth Defendant Fifth Defendant [2025] SC (Bda) 7 civ. (28 Jan 2025) 2025-01-28 Supreme Court
Deborah Lee Trott v DERRICK SEYMOUR Trading as Water Tech & Development [2025] SC (Bda) 9 civ. (20 Jan 25) 2025-01-20 Supreme Court
Ticoe Williams v Bermuda Hospital Board [2024] SC (Bda) 76 Civ. (20 December 2024) 2024-12-20 Supreme Court
Eldon Robinson v Public Service Vehicles Licensing Board [2024] SC (Bda) 73 civ (6 December 2024) 2024-12-06 Supreme Court
Hsbc Bank Bermuda Limited v Gianni Claudio Vigilante Mark Pettingill Rehanna Palumbo Alessandre Palumbo Christopher Trott [2024] SC (Bda) 74 civ (5 December 2024) 2024-12-05 Supreme Court
Annuity & Life Re Ltd Pope Asset Management Llc v Kingboard Copper Foil Holdings Limited Jamplan (Bvi) Limited Kingboard Laminates Holding Limited Excel First Investment Limited Kingboard Chemical Holdings Limited [2024] SC (Bda) 67 civ. (29 November 2024) 2024-11-29 Supreme Court
Global Distressed Alpha Capital I Limited v Christian Michelsen Herman Walton Law Eddlestone [2024] CA (Bda) 26 Civ 2024-11-22 Court of Appeal
The Minister For The Cabinet Office The Postmaster General v Mailboxes Unlimited Ltd [2024] CA (Bda) 23 Civ 2024-11-22 Court of Appeal
Alpine Partners (BVI) L.P. v Sumitomo Pharma UK Holdings Ltd. John Wasty [2024] SC (Bda) 64 civ. (14 November 2024) 2024-11-14 Supreme Court
Afiniti, Ltd. v MUHAMMAD ZIAULLAH KHAN CHISHTI Mr Adam Zellick KC of Counsel and Mr Ben Adamson of Conyers Dill and Pearman Limited for the Appellant Mr Alex Potts KC of Counsel and Mr Richard Horseman of Wakefield Quin Limited on behalf of the Respondent Hearing date(s): 6-7 June 2024 Draft Judgment circulated: 21 August 2024 [2024] CA (Bda) 15 Civ 2024-09-16 Court of Appeal
Wakefield Quin Limited Johann Oosthuizen v MEXICO INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LLC Michael Pooles KC and Laura Williamson of Kennedys Chudleigh Ltd, for the Appellants Keith Robinson and Sam Stevens of Carey Olsen Bermuda Limited, for the Respondent Hearing dates: 13-14 March 2024 Draft Judgment circulated: 20 August 2024 Supplementary Submissions: May 2024 [2024] CA (Bda) 16 Civ 2024-09-13 Court of Appeal
Mexico Infrastructure Finance Llc v Terra Law Limited [2024] CA (Bda) 17 Civ 2024-09-05 Court of Appeal
Re White Rock Insurance (Sac) Limited (Provisional [2023] SC (Bda) 261 Civ. (20 August 2024) 2024-08-20 Supreme Court
The Attorney General v CARLOS MANUEL DE SÃO VICENTE First Defendant AAA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Second Defendant [2024] SC (Bda) 30 Civ. (28 June 2024) 2024-06-28 Supreme Court
Ab Cd v MFD 2022: No. 76 BETWEEN: MFD AB CD EF GH IJ DAVID COOPER [2024] SC (Bda) 28 Civ. (20 June 2024) 2024-06-20 Supreme Court
AB v Mount Saint Agnes Academy [2024] SC (Bda) 27 Civ. (12 June 2024) 2024-06-12 Supreme Court
David William Cox v ROSANNA MARIA COX (in her personal capacity and as an Executor and Trustee of the Last Will & Testament of William Milner Cox dated 19 July 2020) AMANDA JEAN SKINNER (in her capacity as an Executor and Trustee of the Last Will & Testament of William Milner Cox dated 19 July 2020) DAVID GEORGE GOODWIN (in his capacity as an Executor and Trustee of the Last Will & Testament of William Milner Cox dated 19 July 2020) [2024] SC (Bda) 20 Civ. (28 May 2024) 2024-05-28 Supreme Court
Dantae Williams Teshae Trott v CHIEF INSPECTOR PETER STABLEFORD (of the Bermuda Police Service) THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BERMUDA (as the relevant entity under the Crown Proceedings Act 1966) VIA ZOOM [2024] SC (Bda) 16 Civ. (10 May 2024) 2024-05-10 Supreme Court
Re SAMUEL ANDREW BANKS v SIMON STOREY DEIRDRE STOREY [2024] SC (Bda) 12 Civ. (8 April 2024) 2024-04-08 Supreme Court
OASIS INVESTMENTS II MASTER FUND LTD AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 37 - 53) v Jardine Strategic Holdings Limited Jardine Strategic Limited Jardine Strategic Holdings Limited Jardine Strategic Limited [2024] CA (Bda) 7 Civ 2024-03-05 Court of Appeal
Re Marita Hayward Rosina Hardtman [2017] SC (Bda) 60 Civ and Gleeson d Gleeson v Bell [1994] Bda LR 8 CA where DaCosta P (Acting) stated "Any acknowledgement that the user is permissive will be fatal to the claim. As Cheshire observed 'to ask permission is to acknowledge that no right exists' (Cheshire and Burn's Modern Law of Real Property, 14th Ed. p. 550)". She also relied on the case of Patel v W.H. Smith (Esiot) Ltd. 1987 (1) WLR 853 as quoted in Gleeson and other Bermuda cases, for the stated principle that "Accordingly what a party must show is that he claims the privilege, not as a thing permitted to him from time to time by the servient owner, but as a thing he has a right to do.". 2024-02-29 Court of Appeal
Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Limited v BIDZINA IVANISHVILI EKATERINE KHVEDELIDZE TSOTNE IVANISHIVILI (an infant, by his mother and next friend, Ekaterine Khvedelidze) GVANTSA IVANISHVILI BERA IVANISHVILI MEADOWSWEET ASSETS LIMITED SANDCAY INVESTMENTS LIMITED Lord Falconer KC, Steven Thompson KC, Peter Dunlop and Izabella Arnold of Walkers (Bermuda) Limited, for the Appellant Richard Morgan KC, Louise Hutton KC, Sarah-Jane Hurrion and Henry Komansky of Hurrion & Associates Ltd, for the Respondents [2023] CA (Bda) 27 Civ 2023-12-08 Court of Appeal
Trump Panama Hotel Management Llc Trump International Hotels Management, Llc v Hotel Toc, Inc. Luxury Hotels International Lodging Ltd. Hallmark Properties, Inc. Plain Properties, Inc. [2023] SC (Bda) 74 Civ. (12 October 2023) 2023-10-12 Supreme Court
PAUL AND TERESA RODRIGUES (Trading as Rodrigues Pools) v Clearwater Development Ltd. [2023] SC (Bda) 55 Civ. 11 July 2023 2023-07-11 Supreme Court
Robert G. G. Moulder v Commission Of Inquiry Into Historic Losses Of Land In Bermuda [2023] SC (Bda) 48 Civ. 31 May 2023 2023-05-31 Supreme Court
Mexico Infrastructure Finance Llc v WAKEFIELD QUIN LIMITED First Defendant JOHANN OOSTHUIZEN Second Defendant [2023] SC (Bda) 45 Com. 22 May 2023 2023-05-22 Supreme Court
Leyoni Junos v The Governor Of Bermuda [2023] SC (Bda) 39 Civ. 21 April 2023 2023-04-21 Supreme Court
Re The P Trusts [2023] SC (Bda) 31 Civ. 20 April 2023 2023-04-20 Supreme Court
In The Supreme Court of Bermuda CIVIL JURISDICTION 2021: No. 142 AB v Mount Saint Agnes Academy [2023] SC (Bda) 27 Civ. 30 March 2023 2023-03-30 Supreme Court
Leyoni Junos v The Governor Of Bermuda [2023] SC (Bda) 19 Civ. 10 March 2023 2023-03-10 Supreme Court
Robert G.G. Moulder v Commission Of Inquiry Into Historic Losses Of Land In Bermuda [2023] SC (Bda) 18 Civ. 8 March 2023 2023-03-08 Supreme Court
RULING 2021 No 226 Civ Dwyer Williams et al v Erica Williams 2023-01-26
Dove & Butterfly Ltd. v THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL INSURANCE THE MINISTER OF FINANCE First Respondent Second Respondent [2023] SC (Bda) 4 Civ. 13 January 2023 2023-01-13 Supreme Court
Samuel Andrew Banks Simon Storey v Deirdre Storey [2022] SC (Bda) 89 Civ. 18 November 2022 2022-11-18 Supreme Court
Hsbc Bank Of Bermuda Limited v Gianni Claudio Vigilante Mark Pettingill Rehanna Palumbo Alessandre Paulmbo [2022] SC (Bda) 88 Civ. 9 November 2022 2022-11-09 Supreme Court
Ruling 2021 No 373 civ HSBC Bank of Bermuda Limited v Ambiance Holdings Ltd [2022] SC (Bda) 81 Civ. 28 October 2022 2022-10-28 Supreme Court
Raymond Davis Myron Adwin Piper v The Premier Of Bermuda E. David. G. Burt Commission Of Inquiry Into Historic Losses Of Land In Bermuda [2022] SC (Bda) 79 Civ, 22 October 2022 2022-10-22 Supreme Court
Robert G. G. Moulder v Commission Of Inquiry Into Historic Losses Of Land In Bermuda [2022] SC (Bda) 78 Civ, 21 October 2022 2022-10-21 Supreme Court
Vision En Analisis Y Estrategia, S.A. De C.V. Capitaliza-T, Sociedad De Responsabilidad Limitada De Capital Variable v CHRISTOPHER RONALD ERWIN, ALSO KNOWN AS CHRISTOPHER R. ERWIN AND/OR CHRISTOPHER ERWIN EMERGING MANAGER PLATFORM LTD (a segregated accounts company sued in the name of the LAUREOLA INVESTMENT FUND account) (a non-cause of action Defendant) LAUREOLA ADVISORS INC. EMERGING ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD. (a non-cause of action Defendant) BELLA, LLC LAUREOLA ADVISORS USA, LLC LAUREOLA POLICY SERVICING, LLC ERWIN LEGAL, PC, ALSO KNOWN AS ERWIN LEGAL PC AND/OR ERWIN LEGAL, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION AND/OR ERWIN LEGAL A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION EMERGING MANAGER PLATFORM 2 LTD (a segregated accounts company sued in the name of LAUREOLA INVESTMENT MASTER FUND account) (a non-cause of action Defendant) APEX FUND SERVICES LTD (a non-cause of action Defendant) [2022] SC (Bda) 62 Civ (12 August 2022) 2022-08-12 Supreme Court
WONG, WEN-YOUNG Plaintiff/Applicant v GRAND VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED TRANSGLOBE PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED VANTURA PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED UNIVERSAL LINK PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED THE ESTATE OF HUNG WEN-HSIUNG, DECEASED OCEAN VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED WANG, RUEY HWA (aka "Susan Wang") Defendants/Respondents WANG, VEN-JIAO (aka "Tony Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) WANG, HSUEH-MIN (aka "Jennifer Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) IN COURT-VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE [2022] SC (Bda) 60 Com (5 August 2022) 2022-08-05 Supreme Court
BIDZINA IVANISHVILI EKATERINE KHVEDELIDZE TSOTNE IVANISHVILI (An infant, by his mother and next friend, Ekaterine Khvedelidze) GVANTSA IVANISHVILI BERA IVANISHVILI MEADOWSWEET ASSETS LIMITED SANDCAY INVESTMENTS LIMITED v Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Limited [2022] SC (Bda) 56 Civ (25 July 2022) 2022-07-25 Supreme Court
A.B. Binxiang Zhao v Fortitude Reinsurance Company Limited [2022] SC (Bda) 54 Civ (12 July 2022) 2022-07-12 Supreme Court
Gorham'S Limited v David Robinson [2022] SC (Bda) 39 App (3 June 2022) 2022-06-03 Supreme Court
Stevedoring Services Limited v THE HONOURABLE MINISTER OF LABOUR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PERMANENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL Interested Party 1. CHRIS FURBERT JNR. 2. THE BERMUDA INDUSTRIAL UNION Affected Parties [2022] SC (Bda) 38 Civ (3 June 2022) 2022-06-03 Supreme Court
S v S [2022] SC (Bda) 31 Div (5 May 2022) 2022-05-05 Supreme Court
Linda Fay Sousa (As Executrix For The Estate Of Benjamin Sousa) v Barry Capuano [2022] SC (Bda) 21 Civ (30 March 2022) 2022-03-30 Supreme Court
Bentley Friendly Society v Minister Of Finance [2022] SC (Bda) 9 Civ (10 February 2022) 2022-02-10 Supreme Court
Doleta Bean v ANTHONY CAISEY (As Executor of the Deceased's Estate) First Defendant KEITH WAYNE CAISEY (As Sole Beneficiary of the Deceased's Estate) Second Defendant [2021] SC (Bda) 88 Com (16 November 2021) 2021-11-16 Supreme Court
Re Northstar Financial Services (Bermuda) Ltd [2021] SC (Bda) 68 Com (26 August 2021) 2021-08-26 Supreme Court
Re Robert George Green Moulder [2021] SC (Bda) 64 Com (10 August 2021) 2021-08-10 Supreme Court
Andrew Crisson v Marshall Diel & Myers Limited [2020] CA (Bda) 15 Civ Case No: Civ/2020/9 2021-06-11 Court of Appeal
WONG, WEN-YOUNG Plaintiff/Applicant v GRAND VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED TRANSGLOBE PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED VANTURA PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED UNIVERSAL LINK PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED THE ESTATE OF HUNG WEN-HSIUNG, DECEASED OCEAN VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED WANG, RUEY HWA (aka "Susan Wang") Defendants/Respondents WANG, VEN-JIAO (aka "Tony Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) WANG, HSUEH-MIN (aka "Jennifer Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) IN CAMERA-VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE [2021] SC (Bda) 46 Com (9 June 2021) 2021-06-09 Supreme Court
Thomas Doctoroff v 1. Crown Global Life Insurance Ltd. (Bermuda) 2. Paul Gambles 3. Mbmg Investment Advisory Company Ltd. (Thailand) 4. Mbmg Group Singapore Pte (Singapore) 5. Mbmg International Custodians Ltd. (Bvi) 6. Mbmg Asset Management Limited (Mauritius) 7. Garmor Asset Management Ltd. (Mauritius) [2021] SC (Bda) 44 Com (7 June 2021) 2021-06-07 Supreme Court
ST JOHN'S TRUST COMPANY (PVT) LIMITED (Former Trustee de son tort) MEDLANDS (PTC) LIMITED (In its capacity as Trustee) And Plaintiff THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (In her capacity as representative of the charitable beneficiaries) DOROTHY KAY BROCKMAN (In her personal capacity and as representative of the human beneficiaries, including minors and unborn, of the B Trust) BERMUDA TRUST COMPANY LIMITED (Former Trustee) HSBC PRIVATE BANK (C.I.) LIMITED (Formerly Bank of Bermuda (Guernsey Limited) (Former Trustee) MARTIN LANG (In his capacity as the Trust Protector) GROSVENOR TRUST COMPANY LIMITED (Former Trustee de son tort) (The "376 proceedings") v COMMERCIAL JURISDICTION 2020 No: 476 [2021] SC (Bda) 41 Com (12 May 2021) 2021-05-12 Supreme Court
DR. JAY JAY SOARES First Applicant THE HAMILTON MEDICAL CENTER LTD. Second Applicant v Bermuda Health Council [2021] SC (Bda) 27 Civ (8 April 2021) 2021-04-08 Supreme Court
Attorney General And Minister Of Legal Affairs Enforcement v Kenith Clifton Bulford [2021] SC (Bda) 25 Civ (7 April 2021) 2021-04-07 Supreme Court
Michael Pearman v Terry Fray Kendaree Fray [2021] SC (Bda) 73 Civ (26 March 2021) 2021-03-26 Supreme Court
Wanda Ann Pedro v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL & MINISTER FOR LEGAL AFFAIRS Cameron Hill of Westwater Hill & Co (on 6 June 2020), and Simone Smith-Bean of Smith-Bean & Co (on 3 November 2020) for the Appellant Mr Brian Moodie, of the Attorney-General's Chambers for the Respondent Hearing date(s): 6 June and 3 November, 2020 [2021] CA (Bda) 1 Civ 2021-03-19 Court of Appeal
Re Gc Settlement [2021] SC (Bda) 6 Civ (25 January 2021) 2021-01-25 Supreme Court
WONG, WEN-YOUNG Plaintiff/Applicant v GRAND VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED TRANSGLOBE PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED VANTURA PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED UNIVERSAL LINK PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED Defendants/Respondents THE ESTATE OF HUNG WEN-HSIUNG, DECEASED OCEAN VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED Defendant/Respondent WANG, RUEY HWA (aka "Susan Wang") WANG, VEN-JIAO (aka "Tony Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) WANG, HSUEH-MIN (aka "Jennifer Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) IN CHAMBERS-VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE 2020-11-18 Supreme Court
WONG, WEN-YOUNG Plaintiff/Applicant v GRAND VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED TRANSGLOBE PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED VANTURA PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED UNIVERSAL LINK PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED THE ESTATE OF HUNG WEN-HSIUNG, DECEASED OCEAN VIEW PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY LIMITED WANG, RUEY HWA (aka "Susan Wang") Defendants/Respondents WANG, VEN-JIAO (aka "Tony Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) WANG, HSUEH-MIN (aka "Jennifer Wang") (as joint administrator of the Bermudian estate of YT Wang) [2020] SC (Bda) 33 Com (5 August 2020) 2020-08-05 Supreme Court
Marshall Diel & Myers Limited v Andrew Crisson [2020] SC (Bda) 27 Civ (7 May 2020) 2020-05-07 Supreme Court
Stephen John Hunt v Transworld Payment Solutions U.K. Limited (In Liquidation) [2020] SC (Bda) 14 Com (6 March 2020) 2020-03-06 Supreme Court
Imran Siddiqui v Stephen Cernich Caldera Holdings Ltd Athene Holding Limited 2020-03-02 Court of Appeal
Derk Koole v Hg (Bermuda) Ltd [2019] SC (Bda) 89 Civ (17 December 2019) 2019-12-17 Supreme Court
Wandra Ann Pedro v DEPARTMENT OF CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES CHAMBERS RULING Strike Out Application (RSC Order 18/19); Limitation Act [2019] SC (Bda) 85 Civ (28 November 2019) 2019-11-28 Supreme Court
Dennis Robinson v The Parole Board The Commissioner Of The Department Of Corrections [2019] SC (Bda) 76 Civ (19 November 2019) 2019-11-19 Supreme Court
ISLAND CONSTRUCTION LTD First Appellant ZANE DESILVA Second Appellant v REBECCA PHILLIPS First Respondent BARBARA PHILLIPS Second Respondent [2019] SC (Bda) 78 App (15 November 2019) 2019-11-15 Supreme Court
Tony Martin v Larry Engressei 2019-11-08 Court of Appeal
Deepak Raswant v Centaur Ventures Ltd. [2019] SC (Bda) 71 Civ (15 October 2019) 2019-10-15 Supreme Court
S v L [2019] SC (Bda) 70 Com (10 October 2019) 2019-10-10 Supreme Court
Re GA Settlement [2019] SC (Bda) 38 Civ (14 June 2019) 2019-06-14 Supreme Court
WONG, WEN-YOUNG (also known as Winston Wong) WONG, RAY-TSENG (also known as Riley Wong) (an infant by his Next Friend, Grace Tsu Han Wong) v Grand View Private Trust Company Limited [2019] SC (Bda) 37 Com (5 June 2019) 2019-06-05 Supreme Court
Maria Cecilia Aguiar Ashley Silvia Aguiar v Chief Immigration Officer [2018] SC (Bda) 83 Civ (20 November 2018) 2018-11-20 Supreme Court
Hiscox Services Ltd Hiscox Agency Ltd Hiscox Insurance Company (Bermuda) Limited v Yuval Abraham [2018] SC (Bda) 68 Civ (5 October 2018) 2018-10-05 Supreme Court
CIC v KLC [2018] SC (Bda) 65 Div (23 July 2018) 2018-07-23 Supreme Court
CLARIEN BANK LIMITED Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor v MICHAEL JOHN SCOTT Defendant/Judgment Debtor CHAMBERS RULING Application for Stay of Execution of Writ of Fieri Facias (Rules of the Supreme Court, Order 47) [2018] SC (Bda) 44 Civ (21 May 2018) 2018-05-21 Supreme Court
Attorney General And Minister Of Legal Affairs (Enforcement Authority) v Tito Jermaine Smith [2018] SC (Bda) 40 Civ (15 May 2018) 2018-05-15 Supreme Court
Jose Munoz-Vargas v SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA Interpleader [2018] SC (Bda) 28 Comm (27 March 2018) 2018-03-27 Supreme Court
ONE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (FORMERLY KEYTECH LIMITED) First Applicant LOGIC COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (TRADING AS ONE COMMUNICATIONS) Second Applicant BERMUDA DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (TRADING AS ONE COMMUNICATIONS) Third Applicant CABLE CO. LTD Fourth Applicant v REGULATORY AUTHORITY BERMUDA TELEPHONE COMPANY LIMITED TELECOMMUNICATIONS (BERMUDA WEST INDIES) LTD Interested Parties [2018] SC (Bda) 18 Com (5 March 2018) 2018-03-05 Supreme Court
Heart & Soul Construction Limited v VELEKA EVE CHAMBERS RULING Application to set aside Judgment made as a sanction for non-compliance with an Unless Order [2017] SC (Bda) 113 Civ (21 December 2017) 2017-12-21 Supreme Court
David Lee Tucker v HAMILTON PROPERTIES LIMITED CHAMBERS RULING Application to strike out and Elements of the law on strike-out (RSC 18/9) Wrongful Dismissal and Unfair dismissal claims Discrimination on basis of 'age', 'disability' and 'place of origin' (Human Rights Act 1980) [2017] SC (Bda) 110 Civ (11 December 2017) 2017-12-11 Supreme Court
Bermuda Telephone Company Limited v Regulatory Authority [2017] SC (Bda) 109 Civ (8 December 2017) 2017-12-08 Supreme Court
ONE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (FORMERLY KEYTECH LIMITED) First Applicant LOGIC COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (TRADING AS ONE COMMUNICATIONS) Second Applicant BERMUDA DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD. (TRADING AS ONE COMMUNICATIONS) Third Applicant CABLE CO. LTD Fourth Applicant v Regulatory Authority Bermuda Telephone Company Limited [2017] SC (Bda) 97 Civ (14 November 2017) 2017-11-14 Supreme Court
Michael W Jones v Stewart Technology Services Ltd [2017] SC (Bda) 92 Civ (30 October 2017) 2017-10-30 Supreme Court
CLARIEN BANK LIMITED (formerly Capital G Bank Limited) v SHYVONNE HELAINE ROBINSON (as Trustee of the JEM Trust) ARTHUR SAMUEL WINFIELD EBBIN (as Trustee of the JEM Trust) DR JEWEL LANDY (as former Trustee of the JEM Trust) WESTPORT TRUST COMPANY LIMITED (as former Trustee of the JEM Trust) JEWEL HOTEL AND SPA LIMITED (formerly Grape Bay Beach Hotel Limited) DR JEWEL LANDY [2017] SC (Bda) 83 Civ (16 October 2017) 2017-10-16 Supreme Court
Winston Godwin v GREG DEROCHE First Applicant Second Applicant THE REGISTRAR GENERAL THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL THE MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS First Respondent Second Respondent Third Respondent HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION First Intervener PRESERVE MARRIAGE BERMUDA LIMITED Second Intervener [2017] SC (Bda) 75 Civ (22 September 2017) 2017-09-22 Supreme Court
Marco Tavares Paula Tavares v The Minister Of Home Affairs The Governor The Attorney-General 2017-08-16 Supreme Court
The Queen v HARRY LIGHTBOURN TRIAL RULING (Ex Tempore) [2017] SC (Bda) 63 Crim (17 July 2017) 2017-07-17 Supreme Court
Dean Orlando Smith v Clarien Bank Limited [2017] SC (Bda) 53 Civ (30 June 2017) 2017-06-30 Supreme Court
Hsbc Bank Bermuda Limited v JOHN PERCIVAL WHITE (formerly JOHN PERCIVAL SIMMONS) [2017] SC (Bda) 49 Civ (16 June 2017) 2017-06-16 Supreme Court
Bermuda Life Insurance Company Limited v JUNE SANDRA LOUISE ROBINSON First Defendant RALPH ROBINSON Second Defendant CHAMBERS RULING [2017] SC (Bda) 44 Civ (1 June 2017) 2017-06-01 Supreme Court
Dr Fgh v The Chairman Of The Bermuda Dental Board The Permanent Secretary Of The Ministry Of Health And Seniors [2017] SC (Bda) 52 Civ (8 May 2017) 2017-05-08 Supreme Court
Capital Partners Securities Co Ltd v Sturgeon [2017] SC (Bda) 32 Com (1 May 2017) 2017-05-01 Supreme Court
JAMES A L PENISTON trading as EAST BANK CONSULTANTS v Gaythorne Mark Gibbons [2017] SC (Bda) 28 Civ (11 April 2017) 2017-04-11 Supreme Court
LECOLIA CAINES (Trading as "MJP Construction") v Shannon Caines [2017] SC (Bda) 22 Civ (16 March 2017) 2017-03-16 Supreme Court
Evelyn Kim Rewan v AIR CARE LIMITED First Defendant LUKE DAVID ARMSTRONG Second Defendant [2017] SC (Bda) 19 Civ (24 February 2017) 2017-02-24 Supreme Court
COLONIAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant/ Paying Party v KATE THOMSON and JAMES THOMSON Respondents/ Entitled Party 2017-02-20 Court of Appeal
Re In The Estate Of Claude Alfred Allen, Deceased [2017] SC (Bda) 8 Civ (25 January 2017) 2017-01-25 Supreme Court
Ironshore Insurance Ltd. Starr Insurance And Reinsurance Limited Iron-Starr Excess Agency, Ltd. v MF GLOBAL ASSIGNED ASSETS LLP MF GLOBAL HOLDINGS LTD 2016: No.393 ALLIED WORLD ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD MF GLOBAL ASSIGNED ASSETS LLP MF GLOBAL HOLDINGS LTD [2017] SC (Bda) 7 Com (24 January 2017) 2017-01-24 Supreme Court
In The Supreme Court of Bermuda CIVIL JURISDICTION 2016 No: 109 MICHAEL PAULO (Trading as "M.JP Construction") v Damon Simmons 2016-11-22 Supreme Court
Kenneth Dill Jr v The Chief Immigration Officer [2016] SC (Bda) 95 Civ (18 November 2016) 2016-11-18 Supreme Court
Karen Rae Clemons v Minister Of Education [2016] SC (Bda) 92 Civ (14 November 2016) 2016-11-14 Supreme Court
Stanley Winslow Ray, Jr. Gloria Ray v Bernard Arnold Rudolph Simmons [2016] SC (Bda) 86 Civ (3 October 2016) 2016-10-03 Supreme Court
CENTRE FOR JUSTICE Applicant v THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND MINISTER OF LEGAL AFFAIRS (acting on his own behalf and on behalf of the Government of Bermuda, including the Premier and the Parliamentary Registrar) PRESERVE MARRIAGE LIMITED OUTBermuda REASONS FOR DECISION (in Court)1 Judicial review-jurisdiction to join intervening parties- standing to seek declaratory relief in relation to fundamental constitutional rights and in relation to the Human Rights Act 1981 - legality of Referendum (Same Sex Relationships) Act 2016 and proposed referendum- Referendum Act 2012-undue influence-neutrality of polling stations-enforceability of fundamental common law rights 1 The present Judgment was circulated without a hearing. [2016] SC (Bda) 72 Civ (11 July 2016) 2016-07-11 Supreme Court
Bentley Friendly Society v Director Of Transport Control Department [2016] SC (Bda) 65 Civ (15 June 2016) 2016-06-15 Supreme Court
HARRY MATTHIE (on behalf of himself, and the executive and certain other members of the Bermuda Parent Teacher Student Association) v The Minister Of Education The Commissioner Of Education [2016] SC (Bda) 59 Civ (3 June 2016) 2016-06-03 Supreme Court
Capcar Enterprises Ltd v WESTPORT TRUST COMPANY LIMITED (as Trustee of the Laylash Trust) LOIS WILSON ONESIMUS NZABALINDA DAVID RANDOLPH WILSON (in both cases as Trustees of the Laylash Trust) [2016] SC (Bda) 55 Civ ( 12 May 2016) 2016-05-12 Supreme Court
Nigel Paul Clark v The Minister Of Home Affairs [2016] SC (Bda) 51 App (11 May 2016) 2016-05-11 Supreme Court
Cardoza'S Garage Limited v THE MINISTER OF HEALTH SENIORS AND THE ENVIRONMENT REASONS FOR DECISION (in Chambers) Clean Air Act 1991-rules governing service of documents- Appeal to Supreme Court-time for appealing-application for extension of time-governing principles-Rules of the supreme Court 1985 Order 3 rule 5 and Order 55 [2016] SC (Bda) 46 App (2 May 2016) 2016-05-02 Supreme Court
BE'TRICE ANNETTA BUTTERFIELD KANERIKA SHIREE HUGHES as successor of her mother JULIET BURNETTA HUGHES (deceased 11th August 2009) v HSBC BANK BERMUDA LIMITED (formerly the Bank of Bermuda Limited) ANTHEA BERNICE HUGHES (deceased 11th August 2009) as Executors and Trustees for the Estate of Javan Gershom Henry Hughes, deceased [2016] SC (Bda) 43 Civ (25 April 2016) 2016-04-25 Supreme Court
Smith v Ron Magnum 2016-03-31 Court of Appeal
The Minister Of Home Affairs v Bermuda Industrial Union ("Biu") Bermuda Public Services Union ("Bpsu") Bermuda Union Of Teachers ("But") Prison Officers Association Fire Officers Association [2016] SC (Bda) 4 Civ (15 January 2016) 2016-01-15 Supreme Court
KINGATE GLOBAL FUND LIMITED (In Liquidation) KINGATE EURO FUND LIMITED (In Liquidation) v KINGATE MANAGEMENT LIMITED FIM LIMITED FIM ADVISERS LLP FIRST PENINSULA TRUSTEES LIMITED (as Trustee of the Ashby Trust) PORT OF HERCULES TRUSTEES LIMITED (as Trustee of the El Prela Trust) ASHBY HOLDING SERVICES LIMITED EL PRELA GROUP HOLDING SERVICES LIMITED MR CARLO GROSSO MR FEDERICO CERETTI ASHBY INVESTMENT SERVICES LIMITED EL PRELA TRADING INVESTMENTS LIMITED ALPINE TRUSTEES LIMITED [2016] SC (Bda) 3 Com (11 January 2016) 2016-01-11 Supreme Court
A v A [2016] SC (Bda) 2 Div (7 January 2016) 2016-01-07 Supreme Court
GRACE-ANN FOX (t/a Mini Mega Transport Services) v The Minister Of Transport [2015] SC (Bda) 80 Civ (20 November 2015) 2015-11-20 Supreme Court
CIVIL APPEAL No 5 of 2015 THOMAS GLEESON v Marshall Diel & Myers Luciano Aircardi Paragon Trust Company Limited [2015] CA (Bda) 34 Civ (20 November 2015) 2015-11-20 Court of Appeal
Nneka Powell v Penny-Lynn Paynter [2015] SC (Bda) 92 Civ (13 November 2015) 2015-11-13 Supreme Court
Bermuda Press (Holdings) Ltd v Registrar Of The Supreme Court [2015] SC (Bda) 49 Civ (24 July 2015) 2015-07-24 Supreme Court
Trustee N And Others v The Attorney General And Others [2015] SC (Bda) 50 Com (13 July 2015) 2015-07-13 Supreme Court
Michael Pearman v Terry Fray Kendaree Fray [2015] SC (Bda) 33 Civ (8 June 2015) 2015-06-08 Supreme Court
Trustee L And Others v The Attorney General And Others [2015] SC (Bda) 41 Com (15 May 2015) 2015-05-15 Supreme Court
Dennis Arthur Soares Figureido v Cindy Laws [2015] SC (Bda) 21 Civ (16 March 2015) 2015-03-16 Supreme Court
Roshea Lorlette Hill-Cross v The Bermuda Hospitals Board [2015] SC (Bda) 6 Civ (14 January 2015) 2015-01-14 Supreme Court
Hsbc Bank Bermuda Limited v Marcus Williams [2014] SC (Bda) 90 Civ (14 November 2014) 2014-11-14 Supreme Court
Nitin T Mehta Mfp-2000, Lp v Viking River Cruises Limited Viking Capital Limited Misa Investments Limited [2014] SC (Bda) 86 Com (29 October 2014) 2014-10-29 Supreme Court
Nanette Snowden v Dr Terri-Lynn Emery Dr Charles Dyer The Bermuda Hospitals Board [2014] SC (Bda) 75 Civ (25 September 2014) 2014-09-25 Supreme Court
Harold Joseph Darrell v Brenda Dale Myra Virgil The Department Of Human Affairs The Minister Of Culture And Social Rehabilitation [2014] SC (Bda) 69 Civ (3 September 2014) 2014-09-03 Supreme Court
F v F [2014] SC (Bda) 78 Div (25 August 2014) 2014-08-25 Supreme Court
Ministry Of Finance v O SUPPLEMENTARY RULING (In Chambers) [2014] SC (Bda) 60 Civ (17 July 2014) 2014-07-17 Supreme Court
Cory Hill v JOE DaCOSTA MICHAEL DaCOSTA (trading as Bermuda Slaters) [2014] SC (Bda) 55 Civ (24 June 2014) 2014-06-24 Supreme Court
Cynthia Suzanne Patricia Swan v SHERLYN SWAN-CAISEY (on behalf of herself and any other person or persons residing with her) First Defendant REX DARRELL Second Defendant 2014-06-17 Supreme Court
Edward E. Benevides Earlston Eugene Francis Zoe Elizabeth Mulholland Lindell Ashretta Charmee Foster v The Attorney General The Corporation Of Hamilton 2014-06-12 Court of Appeal
Florindo Canale Judy Canale v Stephen Holloway Leslie Holloway 2014-06-06 Supreme Court
Ministry Of Finance v E F H 2014: No O In the matter of a request for exchange of information under the International Cooperation (Tax Information Exchange Agreements) Act 2005 MINISTRY OF FINANCE O 2014-05-30 Supreme Court
Re The Rules Of The Supreme Court 1985, Order 115 2014-04-28 Supreme Court
Trustee 1 Trustee 2 Trustee 3 Trustee 4 v The Attorney General Respondent 2 Respondent 3 [2014] SC (Bda) 24 Com (26 February 2014) 2014-02-26 Supreme Court
The Corporation Of Hamilton v THE OMBUDSMAN FOR BERMUDA COSTS RULING (In Chambers) [2014] SC (Bda) 1 Civ (8 January 2014) 2014-01-08 Supreme Court
Janice Fleming v Director Of Labour And Training [2013] SC (Bda) 80 Civ (18 December 2013) 2013-12-18 Supreme Court
Hiram Edwards v THE MINISTER OF FINANCE First Defendant THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Second Defendant THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT, PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY Third Defendant [2013] SC (Bda) 24 Civ (5 April 2013) 2013-04-05 Supreme Court
Erwin Leon Nisbett v Attorney General Commissioner Of Prisons [2013] SC (Bda) 30 Civ (19 March 2013) 2013-03-19 Supreme Court
Cebelle Dawson v THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BERMUDA POLICE ASSOCIATION REASONS FOR DECISION (in Chambers) [2013] SC (Bda) 14 Civ (13 February 2013) 2013-02-13 Supreme Court
HAROLD DARRELL First Plaintiff v HARDELL ENTERTAINMENT LIMITED Second Plaintiff THE BANK OF BERMUDA LIMITED BOARD OF INQUIRY APPOINTED UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT Interested Party [2012] SC (Bda) 6 Civ (18 January 2013) 2013-01-18 Supreme Court
Joliet 2010 Limited Teodoro 29 Corp v Goji Limited Eran Ben-Shmuel Alexander Bilchinsky [2012] SC (Bda) 69 Com (5 December 2012) 2012-12-05 Supreme Court
Erwin Leon Nisbett v Attorney General Commissioner Of Prisons [2012] SC (Bda) 57 Civ (21 September 2012) 2012-09-21 Supreme Court
Leyoni Junos v HSBC (BANK OF BERMUDA) LTD KEVIN TAYLOR First Defendant Second Defendant [2012] SC (Bda) 33 Civ (29 June 2012) 2012-06-29 Supreme Court
American Patriot Insurance Agency Inc Kenneth A Hendricks Diane M Hendricks v Mutual Holdings (Bermuda) Limited Mutual Indemnity (Bermuda) Limited Glenn Partridge David Alexander Richard Turner Andrew S Walsh [2012] CA (Bda) 3Civ 2012-03-22 Court of Appeal
Oil Basins Limited v CONTICOMMERCE S.A. First Defendant FONDATION ANORA Second Defendant [2012] SC (Bda) 7 Civ (31 January 2012) 2012-01-31 Supreme Court
Re Proview International Holdings Limited [2011] SC (Bda) 49 Com (3 October 2011) 2011-10-03 Supreme Court
Leyoni Junos v Bank Of Bermuda (Hsbc) [2001] CA (Bda) 9 Civ 2011-06-17 Court of Appeal
D. E Shaw Oculus Portfolios, L.L.C. D. E Shaw Valence Portfolios, L.L.C. Cr Intrinsic Investments, L.L.C. v Orient-Express Hotels Limited Orient-Express Holdings 1 Limited John D. Campbell James B. Sherwood Prudence M. Leith James B. Hurlock J. Robert Lovejoy Georg R. Rafael Paul M. White [2010] SC (Bda) 25 Com (1 June 2010) 2010-06-01 Supreme Court
Ann Bartelson Beach v Roger John Batten Beach [2010] SC (Bda) 5 Div (22 January 2010) 2010-01-22 Supreme Court
Re The Elcome Trust [2010] SC (Bda) 3 Civ (18 January 2010) 2010-01-18 Supreme Court
Founding Partners Capital (Bermuda) Limited v The Bank Of N.T. Butterfield & Son Limited [2009] SC (Bda) 29 Civ (2 June 2009) 2009-06-02 Supreme Court
JOSEPH EDWARD WAKEFIELD (As Administrator of the Estate of Herman Murray Bascome, Deceased) v Tanya Lee-Angela Symonds Calvin Eugene Carmichael [2009] SC (Bda) 14 Civ 2009-02-13 Supreme Court
Philip John Perinchief v The Public Service Commission His Excellency The Governor The Attorney-General [2009] SC (Bda) 11 Civ (10 February 2009) 2009-02-10 Supreme Court
Re LLEWELLYN TROTT First Plaintiff DILTON CAINES Second Plaintiff -And- PATRICIA CAINES First Defendant EARLSTON CAINES Second Defendant Date/s of Hearing: 24 November 2008 [2009] SC (Bda) 8 Civ (30 January 2009) 2009-01-30 Supreme Court
WENDELL MALCOLM HOLLIS First Appellant v JOSEPH C. H. JOHNSON Second Appellant ALEXANDER SCRYMGEOUR 2008-06-05 Court of Appeal
WENDELL MALCOLM HOLLIS First Appellant v JOSEPH C. H. JOHNSON Second Appellant ALEXANDER SCRYMGEOUR 2008-06-05 Court of Appeal
Debra Kaye Araujo v Michael Brian Teixeira Araujo [2008] SC (Bda) 11 Div (11 March 2008) 2008-03-11 Supreme Court
Debra Kaye Araujo v Michael Brian Teixeira Araujo [2008] SC (Bda) 11 Div (11 March 2008) 2008-03-11 Supreme Court
RODRIGUES TRUCKING & EXCAVATING LIMITED Applicant v THE MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND E-COMMERCE Respondent [2007] SC (Bda) 61 Civ 2007-11-15 Supreme Court
Phoenix Global Fund Limited Phoenix Capital Reserve Fund Limited v Citigroup Fund Services (Bermuda) Limited The Bank Of Bermuda Limited [2007] SC (Bda) 53 Com 2007-09-27 Supreme Court
ACE BERMUDA INSURANCE LTD Plaintiff (formerly A.C.E. Insurance Company, Ltd) v CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY Defendants CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY [2007] SC (Bda) 36 Com 2007-06-01 Supreme Court
SIMON JEREMY FARMER Plaintiff v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL First Defendant THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Second Defendant [2007] SC (Bda) 14 Civ 2007-02-23 Supreme Court
ADRIAN NASH ARTURO SARMIENTO Plaintiffs v GULF DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL LTD (a company incorporated in Bermuda) KEMP HOLDINGS II LLC (A company incorporated in Delaware) RAVENSWOOD LLC (A company incorporated in Delaware) FREEMARKET GLOBAL LTD (A company incorporated in Bermuda) FREEMARKET PETROLEUM LTD (A company incorporated in Bermuda) Defendants [2007] SC (Bda) 11 Com 2007-02-16 Supreme Court
Winslow Hollis v LISA HOLLIS (as Administrator of the Estate of Barbara Eloise Hollis) Supreme Court
Harold Darrell v Hardell Entertainment Limited The Bank Of Bermuda Limited [2007] SC (Bda) 50 Civ Supreme Court
Larry Winslow Marshall Lamont Winslow Marshall Shaki Deroy Easton Kori Eugene Scott Shane Desmond Oneil Morrissey Audley Herbert Campbell, Jr. Tekle Zion Ming Ryan Frederick Swan Seth Ming Jamal Hartman James Famous Russ Ford Shannon Thomas Adderley v The Deputy Governor Of These Islands The Governor Of These Islands The Attorney-General [2007] SC (Bda) 7 Civ Supreme Court
Tinee Harvey v DENNIKA WARREN Appellant/ Paying Party Respondent/ Entitled Party Court of Appeal
Laep Investments Ltd v EMERGING MARKETS SPECIAL SITUATIONS 3 LTD Bell, JA Introduction 1. On 20 March 2015, we indicated that we would allow the appeal, grant a stay of the Enforcement Order (as defined in this judgment), and set aside the order to wind up the Appellant ("the Company"), and those orders ancillary to the winding up order, including orders relating to the appointment and activities of the Joint Provisional Liquidators ("the JPLs"). Mr Duncan for the Company raised a number of issues upon delivery of judgment. The principal matters were the costs of the JPLs, and whether or not our order should have been to dismiss the winding up petition, rather than set aside the order to wind up the Company. We gave liberty to apply to the trial judge in respect of both matters. In relation to the latter, we would simply comment that in circumstances where the outcome of the proceedings in Brazil cannot presently be ascertained, it seems sensible to allow for the possibility that the Respondent might ultimately prevail. We indicated that we would give our reasons in writing as quickly as possible. This we now do. 2. The dispute ultimately giving rise to this appeal goes back to a reference to arbitration submitted by the Company in Brazil in October 2010. That reference to arbitration followed a dispute as to the existence and/or extent of obligations owed by the Company to the Respondent. The transaction which led to the arbitration request arose from the restructuring of a debt owed by a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, pursuant to which the Respondent discharged a substantial debt owed by the Company and its subsidiaries. In a Ruling dated 1 April 2014 ("the Ruling") the judge at first instance, Hellman J, dismissed the Company's application for a stay of the arbitration award dated 18 March 2013 ("the Award") and held that he was in principle prepared to order that the Company be wound up, subject to hearing the parties as to the terms of such order. The judge then adjourned to hear argument, and when the matter came back before him on 4 April 2014, made an order winding up the Company. He subsequently gave a ruling on 23 April 2014 dealing with other matters relating to the appointment of JPLs, who were by that time represented before him. The Brazilian Arbitration Proceedings and the Status of the Award 3. Pursuant to the Award, the Company was ordered to pay to the Respondent a sum of approximately R$145 million, including interest and costs, an amount said by the judge in paragraph 3 of the Ruling to be equivalent to well in excess of US$73 million at then current exchange rates. On 29 April 2013, the arbitral tribunal rendered an addendum to the Award, providing that payment of the amount awarded became due immediately as of the date of the notification of the Award, presumably because there had been some contention to the contrary. 4. As the judge set out in paragraphs 11 to 15 of the Ruling, there were two principal challenges to the Award made in the Brazilian courts. The first he defined as the Annulment Application, which was filed by the Company on 18 June 2013, in which the Company sought to annul the Award under article 32 of the Brazilian Arbitration Law, on the basis that the decision of the arbitral tribunal was inconsistent with and was rendered in violation of Brazilian public policy. That application was dismissed on 20 June 2013, but this dismissal was in turn reversed by the Court of Appeals of the State of Sao Paulo, on 23 August 2013. The effect of that reversal was to remit the request for annulment to the lower court, and this process has yet to be completed. The judge commented (paragraph 26) that he had no information as to when the lower court was to hear the Annulment Application, and that he had no doubt that the unsuccessful party would wish to pursue an appeal. 5. The second application was defined by the judge as the Suspension Application, which was filed ex parte by the Company and by its parent company LAEP Holdings Ltd ("Holdings") on 1 October 2013 in the 43rd State Lower Civil Court in Brazil. That application was denied the following day, but the Company and Holdings appealed, and on 19 December 2013 the Sao Paulo State Court of Appeals made an interim order ("the Stay Order"), staying the effect of the Award pending the hearing of the Annulment Application. In our view this order and its effect are key to the determination of this appeal. 6. Accordingly, the position at the time of argument in this appeal is that the Award stands as a valid award, albeit one which remains subject to attack in terms of the Annulment Application, and the effect of which is subject to the Stay Order, pending both conclusion of the application to annul the Award, and of any further order which might be made regarding either the terms or continued existence of the Stay Order. Court of Appeal
The Queen v Jerome Bailey Clarke DRAFT Court of Appeal