FG Hemisphere Associates LLC v The Democratic Republic of Congo

• Jurisdiction: Jersey
• Court: Court of Appeal
• Judge: J. W. McNeill,N. P. Pleming,Sir Hugh Bennett
• Judgment Date: 14 July 2011
• Neutral Citation: [2011] JCA 141B
• Date: 14 July 2011

[2011] JCA 141B

COURT OF APPEAL

Before:

J. W. McNeill, Q.C., President; N. P. Pleming, Q.C., and Sir Hugh Bennett.

Between

FG Hemisphere Associates LLC

Respondent/Representor

and

The Democratic Republic of Congo

First Respondent

La Generale des Carrieres et des Mines

Appellant/Second Respondent

and

Groupement pour le Traitement du Terril de Lubumbashi Limited

Appellant/ Party Cited

Advocate J. Harvey-Hills for the Second Respondent and Appellant.

Advocate A. D. Robinson for the Party Cited and Appellant.

Advocate K. J. Lawrence for the Respondent.

The First Respondent did not appear and was not represented.

Authorities

Daily Telegraph Newspaper Company Ltd -v- McLaughain [1904] AC 776.

La Cité de Montréal -v- Les Ecclésiastiques du Seminaire de St Sulpice de Montréal (1889) 14 App Cas 660.

Court of Appeal Jersey Law 1961.

Appeals by the Second Respondent and the Party Cited against Orders of the Royal Court dated 27th October and 15th November 2010.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 1

THE PRESIDENT:

1 As far as costs are concerned Hemisphere will have its costs in relation to both appeals but on the standard basis. For the avoidance of doubt that includes costs in relation to the applications for fresh evidence and in reply thereto.

2 As far as Gécamines’ Ground (vi) is concerned this is an exception to what we have just determined and in relation to Ground (vi) there will be no award of costs either way.

3 As far as leave to appeal to the Privy Council is concerned we are grateful to Advocate Harvey-Hills for addressing us in relation to the test and the way in which this should be approached under Article 14 of the Court of Appeal Jersey Law 1961 as it now stands.

4 In relation to this matter we do not intend to set out a prescriptive test to be followed. We note from the advice of the Board of the Privy Council in Daily Telegraph Newspaper Company Ltd -v- McLaughain [1904] AC 776 that, both in relation to what is said on page 779 in that decision and in what is said on page 778 under reference to advice of the Board delivered by Lord Watson in La Cité de Montréal -v- Les Ecclésiastiques de St Sulpice de Montréal (1889) 14 App Cas 660 the matter is one which really has to be approached on a case by case basis. For our own part, sitting as only three of the members of the Court of Appeal of Jersey we would not wish to say anything at this stage which would necessarily bind those other members...