{\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};}
{\f180\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000000000000000000}CG Times{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f184\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f185\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f187\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f188\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f189\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f190\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f191\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f192\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\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid3892955 Normal;}{\s2\qj \li0\ri0\keepn\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f180\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
\sbasedon0 \snext0 \styrsid3892955 heading 2;}{\*\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\sa120\sl480\slmult1
\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid3892955 Body Text 2;}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar
\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid3892955 header;}{\*\cs17 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid3892955 page number;}}
{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid811014\rsid862776\rsid933470\rsid983853\rsid1003011\rsid1009808\rsid1517820\rsid1598413\rsid1972231\rsid2193419\rsid2309175\rsid2371452\rsid2504626\rsid2506087\rsid3023359\rsid3176464
\rsid3422714\rsid3810279\rsid3822112\rsid3831056\rsid3892955\rsid4019172\rsid4160285\rsid4329331\rsid4331392\rsid4596380\rsid4720720\rsid4744076\rsid4815830\rsid4855016\rsid4931203\rsid5052173\rsid5062183\rsid5123780\rsid5592493\rsid5643559\rsid5930632
\rsid6060947\rsid6160848\rsid6514138\rsid6782860\rsid6953338\rsid7021742\rsid7366506\rsid7483118\rsid7818236\rsid7958375\rsid8016262\rsid8083724\rsid8270074\rsid8524331\rsid8598875\rsid8790013\rsid8866877\rsid9008583\rsid9189166\rsid9452663\rsid9455426
\rsid9776131\rsid10355983\rsid10500829\rsid10712439\rsid10749241\rsid11014019\rsid11292607\rsid11355540\rsid11404427\rsid11410169\rsid11880640\rsid11928628\rsid12015529\rsid12063525\rsid12081942\rsid12211158\rsid12921552\rsid12931985\rsid12983114
\rsid13198352\rsid14055906\rsid14105686\rsid14108652\rsid14307198\rsid14496123\rsid14510136\rsid14695321\rsid14967201\rsid15032169\rsid15159555\rsid15297671\rsid15405516\rsid15541791\rsid15560408\rsid15864576\rsid15945946\rsid16393740\rsid16592213
\rsid16597937\rsid16671932}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title \'93this is a quote, has said, of me saying \'91this is a quote\'92\'94}{\author raikatalau_l}{\operator ruddley_e}{\creatim\yr2011\mo6\dy16\hr14\min31}
{\revtim\yr2011\mo6\dy20\hr16\min25}{\version3}{\edmins4}{\nofpages6}{\nofwords2133}{\nofchars12162}{\*\company Pacific Legal Information Institue}{\nofcharsws14267}{\vern24689}}
\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1440\dgvorigin1008\dghshow1\dgvshow1
\jexpand\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct
\asianbrkrule\rsidroot3892955\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4596380 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4596380 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4596380 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4596380 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\brdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brsp20 \tqc\tx3553\tqr\tx7293\tqr\tx8789\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16393740 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs16\insrsid10500829 \tab }{\fs16\insrsid10500829\charrsid7021742 Fiji National Provident Fund v Jagdish Prasad}{\fs16\insrsid10500829  (HC)}{\insrsid10500829 \tab }{\field{\*\fldinst {
\cs17\fs16\insrsid10500829\charrsid933470  PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\cs17\fs16\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid1003011 6}}}{\fs16\insrsid10500829\charrsid933470 \tab }{\cs17\insrsid10500829\charrsid7021742 
\par }\pard \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid10500829 
\par }}{\*\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 \s2\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 
\f180\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 {\*\bkmkstart FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}FIJI NATIONAL PROVIDENT FUND v JAGDISH PRASAD}{
\f0\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard \s2\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 {\f0\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 {\*\bkmkend FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}
\par High Court Civil Jurisdiction 
\par 31 October, 12 November, 2001 \tab \tab \tab \tab HBA 15/01S
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Tort \endash  negligence \endash  whether superannuation fund can be liable in negligence \endash  whether Appellant}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s negligent advice resulted in nomination being invalid \endash  whether magistrate erred in holding the Respondent}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 had made out his case on the balance of probabilities
\par 
\par Constitutional law \endash  whether the Magistrates}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Decree 35/88 has force of law \endash 
 operation of ss194(1) and 195(1)(e) of the 1997 Constitution \endash  define decrees to be legislative Acts
\par 
\par Civil procedure - whether the Respondent is entitled to commence proceedings in the Magistrates}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
 Court when funds deposited in the High Court \endash  cross appeal on award of further general damages and interest \endash  interest claim not pleaded \endash  whether}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 interest should have been awarded
\par 
\par Fiji National Provident Fund ss34, 35, 43(2); FNPF Regulations regs 51, 53; Magistrates}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Decree 35
/88; 1997 Constitution. ss194(1) and 195(1)(e)\~
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par An account holder Vijay Kumar wished to nominate the Respondent under section 34 of the FNPF Act and completed a nomination form which the Respondent then witnessed.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011  }{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Upon Kumar}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s death, the Appellant advised the nomination was invalid for the 
Respondent}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s attestation. The Respondent claimed damages for his loss, owing to negligence advice of the Appellant. The Magistrates}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Court found a want of care and awarded him $11,667.59 plus costs. The Appellant
 appealed on the grounds that the magistrate erred in concluding that Prasad had made out his case on the balance of probabilities. The Court found that the Appellant presented no contradicting evidence thus the ground was dismissed. As the Magistrates}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Court was a court of summary jurisdiction, and taking into account the fact that the Respondent was unrepresented, and the Appellant}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s concession, it properly assessed the Respondent}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s damages, notwithstanding it was not pleaded. There was no reason why the fund should invoke reg. 51 relating to invalid nominations.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011  }{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 The appellate Court found no merit in a cross appeal on award of further general damages and interest. 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par Held\endash }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 (1) In this day of growing awareness of the benefits of consumer protection, the Appellant}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s primary duty\~ is to its members is to advise a member that his nomination is invalid either when it accepts it or promptly when the error is discovered to prevent a beneficiary}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s loss occurring. It is unrealistic to suggest that a large well endowed specialist organisation such as the Appellant
 has no duty of care to persons \~with whom it de}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 als but who are not it members.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011\charrsid1003011 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 (2) Notwithstanding that the Appellant had deposited disputed funds into the High Court, a litigant is free to commence proceedings within jurisdictional limits wherever convenient.\~
The Resident Magistrate\~had jurisdiction to entertain this action commenced in negligence. Under s43(2) of the Fiji National Provident Fund Act, moneys paid out by the Appellant on the death of a member are not part of the deceased}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s estate and do not constitute an inheritance.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011\charrsid1003011 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 (3) The Respondent is not entitled to interest, which is not pleaded, and is not entitled to general dam
ages which is not proved, except for funeral expenses, which would ordinarily come out of the fund.}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par Obiter dictum \endash  the Magistrates}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Decree 35
/88 is a perfectly valid piece of legislation because the operation of ss194(1) and 1
95(1)(e) of the 1997 Constitution which define Decrees to be Acts, define written laws to include Acts and continue in force written laws passed before the commencement date of the Constitution.\~The statement }{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 no Decree can amend an Act of Parliament}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{
\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  is simply incorrect.
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 The appeal and cross-appeal\~fail and are dismissed. 
\par 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Cases referred to in Judgment
\par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Benmax v Austin Motor Corp}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  [1955] 1 All ER 326
\par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  [1964] AC 465
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
Haroon Lateef with Ilsaad Razak for the Appellant
\par Suresh Chandra for the Respondent
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 12 November, 2001\tab 
\tab \tab }{\b\caps\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 judgment}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Scott, J
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 In July 2000 the Respondent herein (Prasad) commenced proceedings in the Suva Magistrates}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Court.\~ In his Statement of Claim he stated that in June 1999 he and his uncle Vijay Kumar who were both members of the Fiji National Provident Fund (the Fund) went to the Fund}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s office.\~ Vijay Kumar wished to nominate Prasad under the provisions of {\*\bkmkstart s34_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}
section 34{\*\bkmkend s34_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad} of the FNPF Act (Cap. 219-the Act) and upon enquiries being made he was asked to complete a nomination form which Prasad then witnessed.
\par \~
\par The following February Vijay Kumar died.\~ When Prasad went to the Fund}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s Office he was advised that the nomination was invalid. 

\par \~
\par {\*\bkmkstart reg53_FNPF_Regs_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}Regulation 53 {\*\bkmkend reg53_FNPF_Regs_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}of the FNPF Regulations (Cap 219-Subs-the Regulations) provides that:
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1003011 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Any person who a
ttests the signature of a nominator to a nomination shall not be entitled to any benefit thereunder.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 \~
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s case was quite simple: owing to the negligent advice of the Fund the nomination was invalid.\~ Had the nomination been valid then it would have been worth $11,667.59 to him.\~ He sought compensation for his loss by an award of damages.
\par \~
\par The Fund filed a Statement of Defence.\~ It repeated that the nomination was invalid but denied negligence and in particular denied that Prasad was ever advised to witness his uncle}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s signature.\~
 From paragraph 5 of the statement of Defence it appears that the Fund became aware that there was an invalid nomination and attempted to advise Vijay Kumar of this fact but was unsuccessful in doing so to enable rectification to occur before his death.

\par \~
\par In paragraph 8 of the Statement of Defence the Fund pleaded that on 10 May 2000 the sum of $11,667.59 was paid into the High Court under the provisions of section {\*\bkmkstart s35_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}35
{\*\bkmkend s35_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad} of the Act (as amended \endash  see Act 29/86) and that therefore the Plaintiff should have applied to the High Court for the release to him of the funds claimed to be standing to his credit.
\par \~
\par In paragraph 7 of the Statement of Defence the Fund pleaded that no particulars of negligence had been provided by Prasad.\~
 On 13 October 2000 when the matter came up before the Resident Magistrate (Jiten Singh Esq. RM) this point was raised by Mr. Razak.\~ On 23 October Prasad was ordered to furnish particulars of the negligence upon which he relied.
\par \~
\par On 2 November 2000 10 particulars of negligence were filed.\~ A copy is at pages 20 & 21 of the record of the proceedings in the Magistrates}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Court.\~ The part
iculars are really different ways of making the 3 basic complaints which Prasad laid before the Resident Magistrate on oath when the matter came on for hearing on 29 January 2001.
\par \~
\par Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s evidence was that when he and his uncle went to the Fund}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s office they explained that they each wanted to make a nomination.\~ Vijay Kumar wish to nominate Prasad and Prasad wished to nominate his wife.\~
 The clerk in the office was named Tui Fasala and it was he who suggested that they witness each other}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s nominations.\~ 
After the forms were completed and witnessed they were handed in to and accepted by Tui Fasala.\~ About one month later Prasad went back to the office where it was confirmed to him that he was indeed his uncle}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s nominee.\~ About 7 months later his uncle died and he then went back to the office to arrange withdrawal of the funds.\~
 He completed a withdrawal form which was handed in.\~ The following month the Fund advised him that the nomination was invalid because he had witnessed his uncle}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s signature and therefore the nomination fell foul of regulation 53.\~ Later Prasad went to the High Court where he was advised that nothing had been received in his name.\~
 He then filed his writ.
\par \~
\par No other significant evidence was called and it may in particular be noted that nobody was called on behalf of the Fund and that no fund records, not even the nomination forms, were produced.
\par \~
\par In his careful Judgment the Resident Magistrate first accepted that the Fund owed a duty of care }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
to ensure that nominations are properly done and if not properly done to promptly inform the member and the nominee}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 .\~
 He stressed the importance and the special nature of the transaction under consideration and relied on and applied the leading authority }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
{\*\bkmkstart Hedley_Byrne_Helle_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  {\*\bkmkend Hedley_Byrne_Helle_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}[1964] AC 465.
\par \~
\par The Resident Magistrate then evaluated Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s evidence noting that it was not contradicted by evidence called on behalf of the Fund.\~ He did not overlook the fact that Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s evidence was not always entirely consistent observing for example that Prasad first said that he had read the nomination form but then claimed to have overlooked the warning contained on the form against nominees witnessing nominations.\~
 But he found that Prasad had established on the balance of probabilities that he did indeed sign the nomination form at the suggestion of the Fund}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s counter clerk.
\par \~
\par In these circumstances the Resident Magistrate concluded that as a result of the Fund}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s want of care Prasad had been led into error and had lost the entitlement which he would have had, had the nomination been valid.\~ He awarded Prasad $11,667.59 plus costs.
\par \~
\par The Appellant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s grounds of appeal are set out on pages 3, 4 & 5 of the record.\~
 They were amplified by a most comprehensive written submission filed by Mr. Razak.\~ Mr. Chandra filed a very helpful written submission in answer.
\par \~
\par Mr. Razak took the first 3 grounds together.\~ He highlighted each of the weaknesses in Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s evidence and suggested that the Resident Magistrate erred in concluding that Prasad had made out his case on the balance of probabilities.\~ This is always a difficult ground of appeal to argue successfully since it is well settled that in the abs
ence of misdirection an appeal Court will seldom reverse findings of fact reached at first instance (see e.g. }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 {\*\bkmkstart Benmax_v_Austin_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}Benmax v
 Austin Motor Corp}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  {\*\bkmkend Benmax_v_Austin_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}[1955] 1 All ER 326).\~ Mr. Razak pointed out 
that the evidence of Prasad was not corroborated but as a general rule there is no requirement for corroboration.\~ In the present case there was no evidence to contradict the Plaintiff.\~ These grounds fail.
\par \~
\par In ground 4 it was argued that the Resident Magistrate was wrong to hold that the Fund had a duty to advise Prasad that the nomination was invalid.\~ In ground 5 it was argued that the Fund owed no duty of care to Prasad.\~ While I agree that the Fund}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s primary duty\~ is to its members the circumstances o
f this case are such that had the Fund advised Vijay Kumar that his nomination was invalid either when it was accepted or promptly when the error was discovered the effect would have been to prevent Prasad}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s loss occurring.\~ It will also be remembered that Prasad was also a member of\~
the Fund and wished, at the same time as becoming his uncle}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s nominee, to nominate his wife.\~
 In this era of growing awareness of the benefits of consumer protection my view is that it is quite unrealistic to suggest that a large well endowed specialist organisation has no duty of care to persons \~with whom it deals but who are not its members.
\~ Despite the several authorities referred to by Mr. Razak I am satisfied that }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Hedley Byrne}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
 was properly applied.
\par \~
\par The 6th ground was to the effect that the Resident Magistrate should have stopped Prasad proceeding in the Magistrates}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
 Court when it was drawn to his attention that the moneys standing to his uncle}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s credit had been paid into the High Court.\~
 Within jurisdictional limits a litigant is free to commence proceedings wherever convenient.\~ I find no merit in this ground.
\par \~
\par The 7th & 8th grounds raised a number of technical objections to the pleadings and pointed to the fact that no evidence was placed before the court that $11,667.59 was lost by Prasad.\~
 It was also suggested that a nominated person is, by virtue of regulation 51 of the Regulations not entitled }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 as of right}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  to the amount standing to the late member}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s credit.\~
 Taking the evidence as a whole and the concession contained in paragraph 8 of the Defence, bearing in mind that Prasad was a litigant in person and that Magistrates}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Courts are essentially summary in their nature I do not find that there was any error in the Resident Magistrate}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s approach.\~ In reply to my question Mr. Razak was unable to advance any reason at all why the Fund should have invoked {\*\bkmkstart reg51_FNPF_Regs_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}regulation 51
{\*\bkmkend reg51_FNPF_Regs_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}.\~ These grounds fail.
\par \~
\par The final ground of appeal argued by Mr. Razak\~ was that the Resident Magistrate had no jurisdiction to entertain Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
s action since it was concerned with the validity of an inheritance and was therefore excluded by section 2(1)}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 (i)}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
(ii) of the Magistrates}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) {\*\bkmkstart MC_D_35_88_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}Decree 35/88
{\*\bkmkend MC_D_35_88_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}. 
\par \~
\par In view of certain obiter remarks recently made by an acting judge of this court it may be worth pointing out that this Decree in common with many other Decrees is a perfectly valid piece of legislation.\~ This is because of the operation of sections 
{\*\bkmkstart Const_194_1_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}194 (1) {\*\bkmkend Const_194_1_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}and {\*\bkmkstart Const_195_1_e_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}195(1)(e) {\*\bkmkend Const_195_1_e_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}
of the 1997 Constitution which define Decrees to be Acts, define written laws to include Acts and continue in force written laws passed before the commencement date of the Constitution.\~ The statement }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 no Decree can amend an Act of Parliament}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011  is simply incorrect.
\par \~
\par Under section {\*\bkmkstart s43_2_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}43(2) {\*\bkmkend s43_2_FNPF_Act_FNPF_v_Jagdish_Prasad}of the Act moneys paid out by the Fund on the death of a member are not part of the deceased}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1003011 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 s estate.\~ I am therefore satisfied that the Resident Magistrate\~
had jurisdiction to entertain this action which, it should not be forgotten, was in negligence.
\par \~
\par With admirable diligence Mr. Razak advanced every possible argument in support of this appeal but I am satisfied that the Resident Magistrate reached the right conclusion.\~ Accordingly the appeal fails and is dismissed.
\par \~
\par There was a cross-appeal by Prasad the first limb of which was a claim that the Resident Magistrate should have awarded interest on the sum given to Prasad.\~ The Statement of Claim did not seek interest\~
and accordingly the Resident Magistrate was right not to award it.
\par \~
\par The second claim advanced by the Respondent was for an award of damages over and above the $11,667.59 awarded.\~
 Since Prasad gave no evidence of separate loss apart from funeral expenses which would reasonably be expected to come out of the nominated funds I find no merit in this argument.\~ The cross-appeal\~also fails and is dismissed.
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard \qr \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 
\par }\pard\plain \s15\qr \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid3892955\charrsid1003011 Marie Chan
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1003011 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1972231\charrsid1003011 
\par }}