Shanmugathaas v Paramanirupan (No. 2)

In Shanmugathaas v Paramanirupan (No. 2), the respondents, who were receivers appointed by the Court, sought to re-open the decision from a previous hearing to approve their remuneration. The respondents aimed to rely on evidence that was adduced in a further hearing held after the judgment dated 19 September 2019. The respondents sought to use this new evidence to re-open the application for the approval of receivers’ fees decided in the 19 September judgment. The primary legal issue before the Court was whether any part of the 19 September judgment could now be re-opened.
The Court considered the legal principles governing the re-opening of judgments and the evidence presented by the respondents. The Court determined that the evidence presented by the respondents did not provide a sufficient basis to re-open the 19 September judgment. The Court held that the evidence was not new or material, and that the respondents had not demonstrated any grounds for re-opening the judgment. The Court also considered the issue of the approval of receivers’ fees and determined that the receivers were entitled to further fees and disbursements incurred after 14 May 2019, subject to certain conditions. The Court held that the slip rule did not apply in this case, and that the calculation of approval of fees and disbursements under the slip rule was not in error.
The Court's decision was that the 19 September judgment could not be re-opened, and that the respondents were entitled to further fees and disbursements incurred after 14 May 2019, subject to certain conditions. The Court held that the receivers were entitled to further fees and disbursements incurred after 14 May 2019, subject to certain conditions. The Court also held that the slip rule did not apply in this case, and that the calculation of approval of fees and disbursements under the slip rule was not in error.