Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

BRAIMAH v. AZASIME and others

1970

COURT OF APPEAL

CORAM

Apalloo
Lassey
Siriboe JJ. A

Areas of Law

Civil Procedure

AI Generated Summary

In this case, the court expressed regret at denying a remedy to individuals wronged by what was seen as an arbitrary executive action. However, following the precedent in Hilton v Sutton Steam Laundry, the court upheld that statutory limitation applies regardless of the merits, thus ruling in favor of a public officer who benefited from this limitation.

JUDGMENT

“I cannot help expressing my regret at the conclusion to which I am compelled to come because we are denying a remedy to subjects who have suffered wrong by what seems an arbitrary action on the part of the executive and finding for a public officer who is entirely without merit. But as Lord Greene M.R. observed in Hilton v Sutton Steam Laundry [1945] 2 All E.R 425 at p. 429, ‘The Statutory limitation is not concerned with merits. Once the axe falls, it falls and a defendant who is fortunate enough to have acquired the benefit of the Statutory limitation, is entitled to insist upon his strict rights’.”