SL Advocacy

Stamp Duty Act - failure to stamp properly - is it fatal? - can it be produced in evidence? - Ceylease Financial Services Ltd v. Sriyalatha and Another and Seylan Bank Ltd v. Samdo Macky Sportswear (Pvt) Ltd and Others were discussed.  held -  the document can not be produce as an evidence because of failure to stamp it under the regulations made by the Stamp Duty Act.  Peoples Bank v.  Ocean Queen Marine(pvt) Ltd and others  SC CHC 29/2009 Decided on : 28.1.2016 Before :  Eva Wanasundera PC, J  Sisira J de Abrew J  Anil Gooneratne J Sisira J de Abrew J.   The 1st Defendant Respondent is a limited liability company and all times material to the transaction that took place in this case, the 2nd to 6th Defendants-Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the 2nd to 6th Respondents) have acted as Directors of the 1 st Defendant Respondent Company (hereinafter referred to as the 1st Respondent). The 1st Respondent obtained from the Plaintiff Petitioner (hereinafter

This might be helpful to you.

Civil law - substitution - Companies Act No. 07 of 2007, S. 224, 225, 214 and 521, - the rights of a ‘shareholder’ - Civil procedure code, S. 472, 760A, - Rule 38 of the Supreme Court Rules - what is a will?  Semble - "It is trite law that on death of a person his estate comprising of both movable and immovable vests immediately on the heirs, unless the deceased has taken other steps to make disbursements by a last will or other valid instrument during his or her life time. This is by operation of law and the estate passes at once to the heirs and dominium vests in them" G.P. Santhoshini de Silva & others v. Macarthy Private Hospital Limited & others SC (CHC) Appeal No. 09/2009     BEFORE:  Priyasath Dep P.C., J.  Sisira J. de Abrew J.  Anil Gooneratne J.  DECIDED ON: 28.01.2016 GOONERATNE J. This is an appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment of the High Court of Colombo in the matter of an application in terms of Sections 224, 225,

Seminal judgment from Sri Lankan court Pauline De Croos v. The Queen (1968) 71 NLR 169 Present : T. S. Fernando, J. (President), Tambiah, J.,and Sirimane, J. S. C. 73/67-M. C. Colombo South, 68959/ A Trial before Supreme Court-Admission of bad moral character of the accused- Misreception of inadmissible evidence-Circumstances when the Court of Criminal Appeal trill nevertheless dismiss the appeal of the accused-Court of Criminal Appeal Ordinance, ss. 2 (6), 5 (1), 5 (2)-Evidence Ordinance, ss. 54,167-Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 6, 234. The proviso to section 5 (1) of the Court of Criminal Appeal Ordinance which states that the Court of Criminal Appeal may, notwithstanding that they are of opinion that the point raised in the appeal might be decided in favour of the appellant, dismiss an appeal if they consider that no substantial miscarriage of justice has actually occurred, would be applicable in case of misreception of i