Jamaica International Insurance Co Ltd v the Admin General for ...

provisions in the CPR. This submission, which was in error, was not pursued at thehearing before us. Counsel argued instead, that prior to the application being heard,no adjudicating function was taking place, and the purpose of the affidavit is to putbefore the court the evidence on which the person making the application intends torely at the hearing. In any event, counsel submitted, the documents having not beenserved together, could only be a procedural irregularity, as that, she maintained“would not go to the root of the application”.Counsel stated that in thosecircumstances, rule 26.9 of the CPR would be applicable, as it is the general rule thatthe court ought to rectify a procedural error, especially when no particular sanctionhas been expressed.[40] As this is an application for extension of time to file an appeal, and if granted,the appeal must be heard, I will say very little about the merit on the variousgrounds submitted. However, if certain issues in law arise on the competingcontentions of the parties on the application, and those issues could provide thebasis for a ruling in favour of the applicant under rule 1.7 (2) (b) of the CAR, I willmention them for clarity.[41] Rule 11.4 of the CPR states that if an application must be made within aspecified period it is made if it is received by the registry or made orally within thatperiod. Rule 11.11(4) states that the application must be accompanied by anyevidence in support. Rule 8.15(3)(a) and (b) states that an application for extensionof time for serving a claim must be made while the claim form is valid and must be