{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f65\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f66\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f68\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f69\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f70\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f71\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f72\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f73\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\* \ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 Style 1;}}{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid530220\rsid621754\rsid855373\rsid995940\rsid2715621\rsid4665503\rsid4786381\rsid4798745\rsid4805889 \rsid5468517\rsid5980227\rsid6036395\rsid6492916\rsid6884746\rsid6894785\rsid6909269\rsid7219839\rsid7503374\rsid7564529\rsid7759729\rsid7947840\rsid7956470\rsid8205437\rsid9462504\rsid9715245\rsid9843458\rsid9989416\rsid10234819\rsid11276035\rsid12850894 \rsid13191323\rsid13894287\rsid14422107\rsid14436882\rsid15148507\rsid15679395\rsid15933193}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\author Teniau_D}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2009\mo9\dy14\hr11\min14}{\revtim\yr2010\mo4\dy6\hr16\min32} {\version41}{\edmins193}{\nofpages4}{\nofwords2439}{\nofchars13903}{\*\company scims}{\nofcharsws16310}{\vern24689}}\paperw11907\paperh16840\margl0\margr0\margt0\margb0 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot6492916 \fet0\sectd \psz9\linex0\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid2715621\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2 \pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qr \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 [2000] 2 FLR 75 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11276035 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2715621 IN THE }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11276035 COURT }{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid530220 OF APPEAL }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11276035 OF FIJI}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11276035\charrsid11276035 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11276035 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 JULIE DOYLE \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 v \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2715621 PHYLLIS DOYLE \par & \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 TRUSTEE CORPORATION LTD \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 Appeal}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2715621 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appellate Jurisdiction}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Shameem J [In Chambers] \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 7 November 2000 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9715245 ABU0001/}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 97S & ABU0003/97S}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 Stay of execution o}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5980227 f}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 j}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 udgment pending appeal to the Supreme Court - whether a Deed of Settlement }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5980227 b}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 inds estate of}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 deceased spouse after death -}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 balance of convenience test - wh}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 ether stay in interest of justi}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 ce}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 - whether right of appeal to Supreme Court after purported abrogation of th}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 e Constitution - Constitution ss. 1}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269 22(2)(a), Supreme Court Act (14/}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 98) ss}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 . }{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 8,}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 11, 14; Court of}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal Act (Cap.}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 12) s20; Matrimonial Causes Act}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 s}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 .}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 101(2); Judicature Decree s}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 . }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 17(2) \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The 2nd respondent sought to stay execution of the Court of Appeal judgment which adjudged that a Deed of Settlement in favour of the 1st respondent signed by the appellant and the deceased bound the estate of the deceased after his death. The effect of the judgment is that the 2nd respondent as holder of the probate for the deceased's will is obligated to transfer a half-share of the deceased's property i}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 n NZ and also to pay the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st respondent $360 per month from January 1976 (maintenance).}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 Held}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 - (1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 ) Stay of execution of judgment wou}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746 ld not be in the interests of justice in view of the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st respondent's age and the fact that she can repay the appellant should the appellant succeed in the appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (2) There is a right of appeal to Supreme Court on a presumption of validity of the Constitution and the 1997 Constitution continued to apply unt il judicial determination to the contrary.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Stay refused.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Cases referred to: \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid5980227 appl}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 Suresh Charan v Bansraj}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269 Civil App. ABU }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 42}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269 /}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 99 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 appl }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 Mitchell v DPP}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 (1986) LRC (Const) 35}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 appl }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 Bhutt}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 o v Chief of Staff Pakistan Army PLD}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 (1977) SC 670 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 appl}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5980227 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 Ved Prakash v NLTB}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 H}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269 BC }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 409D}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269 /}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 96L \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid5980227 cons}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid5980227 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 John}{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 sto}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid10234819 n}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 v Krakoroski}{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 (1965) 113 CLR 552 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6884746\charrsid6884746 \par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6909269\charrsid2715621 V}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7219839\charrsid2715621 iren Kapadia for the appellant \par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4805889\charrsid2715621 Mahendra B. Pat}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 el for the 1}{\i\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 st}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 respondent \par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid2715621 Peter Knigh}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 t for the 2}{\i\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 nd}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid2715621 respondent \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 7 November 2000. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid14436882 DECISION (IN CHAMBERS) \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid14436882 Shameem J \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 This is an application by the 2 nd Respondent to stay execution of a judgment delivered by the Fiji Court of Appeal on 12th November 1999, pending appeal to the Supreme Court, or the full court of the Fiji Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 On 14th July 2000, the Fiji Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal certified the appeal as being one which raised issues of significant public importance, and which raised far reaching question}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4786381 s of law, under section 122(2)(a}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 ) of the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1998.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid14436882 The Facts \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The facts, which are not in dispute , are that the 1st Respondent was the former wife of Patrick Joyce Doyle of Sigatoka. He died in 1990, and probate of his will, was granted to Anthony William Cooper the Manager of B}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6894785 urns Philip Trustee Company Ltd,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (the 2nd Respondent). The sole beneficiar y of the estate was Julie Doyle, the widow of the deceased, and the Appellant in the appeal before the Supreme Court. The value of the estate, when }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6894785 probate was granted, was $236,0}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 00, and it appears that the Appellant paid out this sum (save for $1,000) to the beneficiary before the appeal in the Court of Appeal was heard. \par \par The Appellant (Julie Doyle) and the deceased were separated by 1975, and on 4th June 1975, they executed a Deed of Settlement agreeing inter alia, to a transfer of half-share of the deceased's p}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 roperty in New Zealand to the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st Respondent, and to the payment of $70,000 to her from the disposition of a company. The deceased also agreed, in the Deed, to pay the }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 sum of $F360 per month to the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st Respondent "for the rest of her life or until re-marriage."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par Fresh divorce proceedings commenced in Fiji, and the decree nisi included an order for }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 maintenance to be paid to the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8205437 st Respondent at $3}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 60 per month with effect from 22nd January 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 976. The decree absolute, on 21}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st May 1976, made no mention of the Deed of Settlement of 4th June 1975. \par \par After the death of the deceased, the main}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 tenance payments stopped. The 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st Respondent then claimed that the maintenance payments continued to be payable after the death of the deceased and that she was also owed $70,000 as a lump sum in settlement of her future maintenance entitlement.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 In the High Court, Byrn}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 e J granted leave to enforce the maintenance order made in the}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 decree nisi, under section 101}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (2) of the Matrimonial}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 Causes Act, and awarded the 1}{\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid14436882 st}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Respondent a sum of $60,000 for future maintenance.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The Appellant appealed to the Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 Appeal, claiming that the 1}{ \fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 st}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Res pondent had no right to maintenance because the Deed of Settlement, was extinguished on the death of the deceased. She argued that the decree nisi which superseded}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 the Deed of Settlement, did not authorise maintenance to be paid to the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 1}{ \fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid2715621 st}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Respondent after the death of the deceased.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 At the appeal, the only real issue was whether the Deed of Settlement was superseded by the decree nisi. Counsel conceded that the lump sum payment for future maintenance could not be justified. \par \par The appeal, on the remaining issue, was dismissed, the Court holding (at page 15 of the judgment) that "the decree nisi maintenance order could, with leave of the court, bind the estate of the deceased."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The Appellant now appeals to the Supreme Court on two questions. They}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 are:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 (1) }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Whether the provisions of the D}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 eed of Settlement dated 4}{\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid10234819\charrsid9462504 t}{\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9462504 h}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9462504 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 June 1975 relating to the payment of maintenance contain}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9462504 ed in Clause 1 of the Deed are v}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 alid and enforceable against Trustee Corporation }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 limited}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 .}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (2) Whether the maintenance order contained in a Decree Nisi survived the death of the husband.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid14436882 The Appeal \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Under section 122(1) of the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1998, the Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction, to hear and determine appeals from all final judgments of the Court of App eal. Section 122(2) provides that an appeal may not be brought from a final judgment of the Court of Appeal unless leave to appeal on a question certified by it to be of significant public importance is granted or, the Supreme Court gives special leave to appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Section 8 of the Supreme Court Act No. 14 of 1998 provides:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 "A single judge of the Court of Appeal may, in respect of any appeal pending before the Supreme Court, make such orders and give such directions as he or she considers the interests of justice or the circumstances of the case require."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The Supreme Court Act was purportedly repealed by the Administration of Justice Decree, which was then repealed and replaced by the Judicature Decree No. 5 of 2000. The Judicature Decree purports to abolis h the Supreme Court, and instead under Section 16 purports to provide that the final c}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4805889 ourt of appeal in F}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 ij}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4805889 i}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 , is the Court of Appeal. Section 17(2) provides:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14436882 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 "Any judgment or decision of the Court of Appeal that was pending in the former Supreme Court shall be heard and determined by a Court of Appeal}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4805889 consisting of 5 Justices of th}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 e Court of Appeal none of whom was a member of the Court of Appeal which delivere d the judgment or decision which is under appeal and only if the pending judgment or decision raises a matter of great public importance."}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6884746 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Unfortunately the Decree does not replicate section 8 of the Supreme Court Act in relation to the power of a single judge of the Court of}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal in relation to appeals to the full court of the Court of Appeal under section 17(2).}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 However section 20 of the Court of Appeal Act Cap. 12, as amended by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Act 1998 gives to the single judge of the Cour}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882 t of Appeal power "to stay execution}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 or make an interim order to prevent prejudice to the claims of any party pending an appeal."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14436882\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Before the amendment of section 20 of the Court of Appeal Act, a person aggrieved by the decision of the single judge, could have the m}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8205437 atter determined afresh by the f}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 ull }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 court. That right is now no long}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 er available in civil appeals.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4805889 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (See }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Suresh Charan -v- Bansraj}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Civ.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8205437 App. ABU0042/}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 99 per Tikaram P).}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Counsel for the Appellant submitted that, wit}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 h the purported repeal of the }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Supreme Court Act, and the amendment of the Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal Act, this application was the only opportunity he had to apply for stay. This submission is of course}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 only valid, if it is accepted that the repeal of the Supreme Court Act, and the abolition of the Supreme Court, are valid}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 .}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 That is a question that only the courts can determine.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 I understand that the question of the purported }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9843458 abrogation of the Constitution}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 is currently pending in the Lautoka High Court, and that the determination of that question will effectively determine th}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9843458 e course that this appeal will r}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 un. I am not}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid9843458 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 told whe}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9843458 ther any application has been m}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 ade in the High Court to uphold the validity of any of t}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9843458 he Decrees passed since May 29}{\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid9843458\charrsid7564529 th}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9843458 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 2000, on the basis that they were necessary for the maintenance of law and order. However, if the Constitution is valid, and the Supreme Court Act has not been effectively repealed, then the party aggrieved by the decision of a single judge of the Court of Appeal, may apply afresh to the single judge of the Supreme Court under section 11, and section 14 of the Supreme Court Act. \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid9843458 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid9843458 That is of course a matter for a party aggrieved by this judgment to pursue. However for the purposes of this decision, I consider}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 that the power to grant a stay of execution of judgment is given to a single judge of the Court of Appeal}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 under section 8 of the Supreme Court Act, and that the right of appeal to the S upreme Court, as provided for under section 122 of the Constitutional (Amendment) Act 1998, remains intact under the presumption of constitutional validity. It follows that the section under which I exercise jurisdiction in this application, is section 8 of the Supre}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 me Court Act.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par \par The rationale behind this }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13894287 approach is an orthodox and wel}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 l-settled principle of constitutional law. It was the principle applied in the case of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Mitchell -v- }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid5468517 D}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 PP}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10234819 (}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 1986) LRC (Const) 35, and subsequently in cases such as }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Bhutto -v- Chief of Staff Pakistan Army}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid10234819 PLD }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (1977) SC 670. It was this principle that was applied by Madraiwiwi J in }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Ved Prakash -v- }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 N}{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 LTB}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4665503 Civil Action HBC}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7564529 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13894287 0409D/}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 96}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4665503 L}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 .}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 \par For these reasons, on the question of the jurisdiction and powers of the court, the section under which this application is deemed to have been made is section 8 of the Supreme Court Act. In practical terms, of course the nature of the discretion under se c tion 20 of the Court of Appeal Act, and under section 8 of the Supreme Court Act, is the same. In considering a stay pending appeal in any court, the court has a wide discretion to act in the interests of justice. Matters to be considered are whether ther e are reasonable prospects for the success of the appeal, any prejudice to the party who would be deprived of the fruit of the success of his/her litigation, and whether if the stay were not granted, the applicant's appeal would be rendered nugatory and/or that the applican}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 t might be ruined as a result. T}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 here is no dispute that these are the principles relevant to an application for stay. \par \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Submissions \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 In support of this application counsel for the 2nd Respondent, and counsel for the Appellant says that the appeal clearly has merits particularly because the decision of the Court of Appeal is not consistent with the decision of the High Court of Australia in }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Johnston -v- Krakowski}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 (1965) 113 CLR}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4665503 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 552 on the same point. Counsel further says that the estate has now been disbursed to the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appellant, and that the 2nd Respondent (against whom the judgment is to be executed) now only has $1000 on the account of the estate. Counsel for the 2nd Respondent says that the Trustee Corporation would be forced to pay the 1st R espondent from its own funds if the stay were ref}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 used.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Counsel further submits that the 1st Respondent was said, at the trial, to be financially badly off, and that therefore she would be in no position }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 to reimburse the judgment sum i}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 f the appeal succeeds . He says that the 1st Respondent is now 77 years old, and if she dies while the appeal is pending, the Respondent would be forced to take the difficult steps of reimbursement from her estate.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid855373 Counsel for the l}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st Respondent submits that his client has suf ficient assets to cover the amount of money owed to her, that the litigation in the case has continued since 1994}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15148507 ,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 and that she was still being deprived of the fruits of the judgment}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 both in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. He said that at 77 years of age, she might die before she receives the money she says is owing to her, and that due to the current confusion about the existence or otherwise of the Supreme Court, considerable delay was likely before this appeal was heard.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 All counsel agreed that a hearing before the Supreme Court on this matter, would be preferable to a hearing by a full court of the Court of Appeal. It appears that the original application for stay pending appeal to the Supreme Court, was withdrawn on the instructions of the cou rt registry and replaced with an application for stay pending appeal to the Court of Appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid5468517 Stay \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 For the purposes of this application, I accept that there are merits in the appeal. The Court of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4665503 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Appeal, which certified the appeal as being one of public im portance, would not have done so, if it thought that the appeal lacked merit. There is no doubt that the issue of whether a Deed of Settlement survives a Decree Nisi, and binds the estate of a deceased spouse after his/her death, is a matter which require s guidance from the highest appeal court in Fiji.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The next question is whether a refusal of a stay order would render the appeal nugatory. If the Appellant succeeds in this appeal, the 1st Respondent must pay the Appellant all sums paid to her, in execution of}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 j}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 udgments in the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 High Court, and Court of Appeal. If she does not, or is unable to do so, the Appellant's appeal will be rendered nugatory. The affidavit material in the court record, which was referred to by all counsel, suggests that the 1st Res pondent was in dire financial straits at the time of her trial. However, it appears that she has since inherited a substantial sum of money and that she possesses assets in New Zealand which are valued at a much larger sum than the }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid855373 $}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 32,000 owed to her in July of this year (excluding costs). She will clearly b}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 e in a position to pay this sum}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 back to the Appellant, if she survives the appeal process. She is now 77 years old. It is possible that she may not survive the process, and that therefore the Appellant may have}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 to pursue her claim with the 1s}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 t Respondent's estate. \par \par Such a step, whilst being inconvenient, and time-consuming, is not however}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 , impossible to achieve. Indeed,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15148507 extra-j}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 urisdictional claims are now common-place and fairly efficiently effected. \par \par The prejudice on the other hand, to the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 1}{\fs18\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid2715621 st}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Respondent, is far more serious. She may not survive the appeal process, and may never enjoy the fruits of a long and exp}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 ensively-conducted litigation. }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 The judgment sum, at her age and in her circumstances may fundamentally affect the quality of her last years.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Furthermore, with the current uncertainty about the existence or otherwise of the Supreme Court, counsels' obvious preference for the Supreme Court, and the inevitable delay while the challenges to the purported abrogation of the}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 Constitution are pursued through the court system, this appeal is unlikely to be heard in the near future. The Registry is unable to give any indication of when the Court of Appeal is likely to agree to sit as a full court under the Judicature Decree.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid6884746 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 I see no reason why the 1st Respondent should be deprived of the fruits of litigation for an indefinite period of time, while our legal and judicial system clarifies the position of the Supreme Court. It is of course, no fault of any of the}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 parties that this situation had arisen. However, in the circumstances I consider that a stay of execution of judgment would not be in the interests of justice. \par \par Of course, the judgment is against the 2nd Respondent, who has now disbursed the funds from the estate. It may seem unfair that the 2n}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 d Respondent must now pay the 1}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 st Respondent from its own funds. However there is a pending indemnity}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid6884746 action in the High Court by the 2nd Respondent, against the Appellant, and a resolution of this appeal, can th en lead to the hearing of that action as soon as the parties are able to expedite the same. \par \par For these reasons, this application is dismissed. Costs are in the cause. \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid995940 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid5468517 Applica}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4665503 t}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517\charrsid5468517 ion dismissed}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5468517 . \par }\pard \qr \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2715621 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4798745\charrsid2715621 Merese}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9989416\charrsid2715621 ini R Vuniwaqa}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4798745\charrsid2715621 \par }}