After
hearing both counsels in this matter on 29 August 2006, I did indicate to them
I was reserving judgment and would make an effort to hand down my decision this
morning.
Whilst
I was in the middle of writing my judgment, in the afternoon of 30 August 2006,
the respondent's counsel filed her notice of opposition.
It
is not normal, even in urgent chamber applications, that, after the case has
been heard, and all arguments sealed, a party then makes an attempt to file
further papers without the leave of the court. Doing so would amount to
smuggling documents in a court record, and, if accepted, would be tantamount to
ambushing another litigant, or to have an unfair advantage over such other
litigant.
It is for this reason that in my determination
of the issues at stake I felt inclined to completely ignore the filed notice of
opposition and proceed to consider the submissions made by both counsel,
together with the documents properly filed of record prior to argument, as well
as the case authorities which the court had given both counsel to submit after
their formal submissions.
