PIERIDES ν. REPUBLIC
(1987)3 CLR 1807 THE CYPRUS LAW REPORTS ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ CyLaw | Αναφορικά μ'εμάς | " target="_top">Επικοινωνία | Όροι χρήσης Έρευνα - Κατάλογος Αποφάσεων - Εμφάνιση Αναφορών (Noteup on) - Αρχείο σε μορφή PDF - Αφαίρεση Υπογραμμίσεων
(1987)3 CLR 1807 1986 November 19 [TRIANTAFYLLIDES. P.] IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 146 OF THE CONSTITUTION DEMETRAKIS PIERIDES, Applicant, v. THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS THROUGH
- THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS,
- THE MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS AND WORKS, Respondents. (Case No. 329/80). Recourse for annulment - Re-opening of hearing for the purpose of adducing further evidence, application for - In the circumstances and bearing in mind the inquisitorial nature of the proceedings and the wide power of an administrative Court to receive evidence, the application would be granted. The facts of this case sufficiently appear in the judgment of the Court. Application granted. Cases referred to: Christou v. Republic
(1969)3 C.L.R.
- Application. Application by Counsel for the applicant for an order of the Court for the re-opening of the hearing so that the applicant may adduce further evidence. K. Michaelides, for the applicant. A. Vassiliades, for the respondents. N. Papaefstathiou, for the interested party. Cur. adv. vult TRIANTAFYLLIDES P. read the following decision. Before the: delivery, on the 28th June 1986, of the reserved judgment in this case counsel for the applicant filed, on the 4th June 1986, an application seeking an order of the Court for the re-opening of the hearing so that the applicant may adduce further evidence. The said application is supported by an affidavit sworn by George Vryonides, who is the person managing the affairs of the applicant in Cyprus. He has sworn that such application has proved to be necessary in the interests of justice since the applicant has to adduce further expert evidence in view of the conflicting affidavits which have already been filed by the parties in the present proceedings. The re-opening of the hearing is sought, too, because counsel for the applicant wishes to cross-examine Marios Meletiou, who is a civil engineer in the service of the interested party, in relation to the contents of his affidavit dated the 31st May
- As a matter of fact on the 2nd June 1984, before judgment was reserved, counsel for the applicant stated that he wished to cross-examine affiant Meletiou and on the 14th June 1985, after the Court had heard oral arguments supplementing the written addresses of counsel for the parties, the Court reserved its judgment on V the understanding that if it came to appear that the outcome of the case might be affected by disputed issues of fact then the hearing would be re-opened so as to afford to counsel the opportunity to cross-examine if they wished, any affiant, including affiant Meletiou. Having heard counsel in support of, and against, the application for the re-opening of the hearing of this case and bearing in mind the inquisitorial nature. of the proceedings in a recourse under Article 146 of the Constitution, such as the present one, as well as the wide powers which an administrative Court has to receive evidence for the determination of the issues before it (see, in this respect, inter alia, Christou v. The Republic,
(1969)3 C.L.R. 134, 148, 150) 1 have decided, in the exercise of any relevant discretionary powers, to re-open the hearing of this case in order to allow counsel for the applicant to adduce, by way of affidavit, further expert other evidence, and, then, in the light of such evidence, I shall decide whether to allow the production of any further evidence by any other party or whether to permit the cross- examination of any one of the affiants, including affiant Meletiou. Application granted. cylaw.org: Από το ΚΙΝOΠ/CyLii για τον Παγκύπριο Δικηγορικό Σύλλογο