Supreme Court of Mauritius in Port Louis - a Visit

As a law student it is important to become familiar with the court system – its functioning, structure and organisation. In order to familiarise myself with the courts, I visited the Supreme Court of Mauritius in Port Louis. It is the final court of appeal in the Mauritius judicial system and has the full power and jurisdiction to hear and determine any civil or criminal proceedings. This is similar to the Supreme Court of the UK which is the final court of appeal for all civil cases and criminal cases from English courts.

The entrance to the premises was guarded by a single policeman, and although I expected a thorough security check to be part of the normal procedure, I was simply directed to the courtrooms and told to switch off my phone when I entered the courtroom. The courtyard was teeming with people, most of them lawyers who wore formal dress and carried themselves in a dignified manner. The buildings were old and robust, and gave the impression that this was a place of great prestige and importance.

I was able to witness two open court sessions, both civil. The open court sessions serve to make the legal process transparent to the public. The courtrooms that I entered were presided over by two judges, (male and female) -who decided the cases.  Only one of them spoke and he spoke in a clear and authoritative manner, constantly questioning the parties (Appellant(s) and Respondent(s)). He displayed some impatience in his comments and facial expressions when a barrister wouldn’t address the issue and question he posed. The barristers wore white shirts with a distinctive flap collar similar to the ones worn by barristers in English courts. The judges wore black gowns and unlike in English courts neither judges nor barristers put on wigs. The legal professionals delivered their arguments in a courtly manner, interacting politely with each other often using the phrase ‘My learned friend’, when referring to opposing counsel and referring to the judges as ‘My Lord’. They kept their composure throughout, even during the rigorous questioning from the judge. The legal clerk and the usher fulfil the same role as their counterparts in the English courts - managing the court on behalf of the judge and ensuring the smooth flow of court proceedings

There were jury boxes on either side of the courtroom, as well as a witness stand. As in the case in England and Wales, only in the most serious criminal cases do the judges sit with a jury. The barristers that were to plead their client’s cases sat behind Senior Counsel. It was quite difficult to comprehend the cases as the facts of the cases where not discussed -as is the case in an appellant court. The judges had already read the facts and judgements made by all lower courts before the commencement of the proceedings -as they confirmed when the barristers asked whether they would need a reading of the facts first. The proceedings therefore consisted of a statement of the ground(s) of appeal by the appellant’s counsel and a rebuttal by the respondent’s counsel. Further to this, it was difficult to follow as there were three different cases being either heard or decided in the same court session.  From what I understood from the two different cases that were heard, was that one concerned issues of the legality of an eviction and the other involved a car accident and the error of the magistrate in judgement by not acknowledging the appellant’s version of the account of the accident. The appellants constantly referred to previous court decisions, referred to as judicial precedent, which is similarly applied in English courts. They attempted to distinguish between the previous cases and their current one in order to point out errors made by lower courts in interpretation.