Jonathan Joseph v. June De Silva – sllr 1990 volume 2 page 175

The case between Jonathan Joseph (plaintiff) and June de Silva (defendant) addressed whether a seduction claim based on a promise of marriage may succeed when the defendant does not testify, and whether such failure to appear can be treated as sufficient corroboration under Section 6 of the Maintenance Ordinance. It was held that the plaintiff’s credible testimony, supported by documentary evidence and unrefuted by the defendant, could amount to adequate corroboration under prevailing legal standards. This position was grounded in legal precedents such as Cracknell v. Smith and Moore v. Hewitt, reinforcing that the absence of denial can—in the appropriate contexts—support the plaintiff’s case. The appeal was dismissed with costs, thereby upholding the District Judge’s order.

S. B. Goonewa