Daniel Robinson v Trade Board Ltd and Attorney General of Jamaica

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Judge: Lawrence-Beswick —
• Judgment Date: 21 October 2011
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2011] 10 JJC 2102
• Date: 21 October 2011
• Docket Number: CLAIM NO. 03689/2010
• Court: Supreme Court (Jamaica)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

CLAIM NO. 03689/2010

BETWEEN

DANIEL ROBINSON

CLAIMANT

AND

TRADE BOARD LIMITED

1 ^ST DEFENDANT

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF JAMAICA

2 ^ND DEFENDANT

Glenroy Mellish for Claimant

Harrington McDermott instructed by Director of State Proceedings for the — ^st and — ^nd Defendants

Setting aside default judgment — permission for proposed defence to stand

Lawrence-Beswick —

1 This matter concerns two applications by the Trade Board - one to set aside a default judgment and the other, an application to permit its defence which was filed out of time to stand.

2 The claimant, Mr. Daniel Robinson, is a Court Bailiff. The first defendant, Trade Board Limited (Trade Board) had obtained a Writ of Seizure and sale against Grains Jamaica Limited and the Attorney General's Chambers as attorneys-at-law for Trade Board, engaged the bailiff to execute it. Trade Board also obtained an order for sale of land of Grains Jamaica Limited.

3 On May 28, 2001, Bailiff Robinson executed the writ and secured the chattels and land which he had seized on behalf of Trade Board. Several expenses were thereby incurred by Mr. Robinson. He sought payment from the Trade Board.

4 The Trade Board did not pay to Mr. Robinson the amounts which he claimed had become due. In July 2010, he sued the Trade Board and the Attorney General for the outstanding amounts. In a letter of February 1, 2007, a member of the Attorney-General's Chambers signing for the Attorney General had stated, "at a convenient time [we will] settle the various costs, fees and expenses owing to [the claimant's bailiff]." The bailiff regarded this as the Attorney General's undertaking.

The money was not paid. In a further attempt to obtain payment, Bailiff Robinson had written to the Attorney General in a letter dated September 4, 2009 including a Bailiff Report which had been previously submitted on May 2, 2008 and which showed the outstanding balance. The monies remained unpaid despite repeated telephone calls and letters.

5 The Attorney General is sued as an officer of the Court, requiring her to "honour the undertaking" she is said to have given.

6 The Director of State Proceedings acknowledged service of the claim form and particulars of claim on both the Trade Board and the Attorney General but filed no defence within the prescribed time. Judgment in Default of Defence was therefore regularly entered against the Trade Board in November 2010 and the claim against the Attorney General was abandoned.

7 In arguing that the judgment should be set aside, Counsel for Trade Board relies on Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules ( CPR) 2002.

Rule 13.3( 1) CPR 2002 empowers the Court to set aside a default judgment regularly obtained if the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim.

Rule 13.3(2) further mandates that in making this determination, the Court must consider if the defendant (a) has applied to the Court as soon...