Piyaseeli v. Prematilleke – sllr 1986 volume 1 page 047

In the case between Piyaseeli and Prematilleke, the court addressed whether an order requiring the payment of costs by a specified deadline could result in dismissal of the action if the costs were not paid, particularly in the absence of explicit party consent. The holding established that a cost order imposed without the parties’ agreement does not empower the court to dismiss the underlying action solely for non-payment. Reliance was placed on the precedent in Mamnoor v. Mohamed, clarifying the conditions under which adjournments linked to cost orders are enforceable. The decision resulted in the setting aside of the lower courts’ orders, the removal of the cost condition, and the direction that proceedings resume from the point of adjournment, reaffirming that cost orders must not be u