Application for interlocutory injunction – Whether contract for sale of property binding and enforceable – Effect of agreement held in escrow – Whether pre-emption right valid – Mortgagee’s rights-priority of equities – Whether feed mill and wharf are fixtures – Whether nominee bona fide is a true nominee.

Whether section 51 of Securities Act creates a statutory tort – Whether commercial and civil court should exercise its discretion to make a declaration where the statutory provision creates a criminal offence

WHETHER TENDER WAS ACCEPTED-WHETHER THERE IS A CONCLUDED

CONTRACT – WHETHER DEFENDANT IS ESTOPPED BY ITS CONDUCT FROM

RELYING ON CERTAIN CLAUSES – WHETHER CLAIMANT ENTITLED TO DAMAGES –

WHETHER THE FACT THAT VESSEL IS NOT OWNED BY CLAIMANT PRECLUDES A

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES – WHETHER CLAIM FOR INTEREST PURSUANT TO THE LAW

REFORM (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT MUST BE PLEADED – WHETHER

WHETHER THE FAIR COMPETITION ACT APPLIES TO GENERALLY TO THE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY AND SPECIFICALLY TO MERGERS AND

ACQUISITIONS– WHETHER THE FAIR TRADING COMMISSION HAS JURISDICTION

IN RELATION TO THE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF CLARO BY

DIGICEL OR TRANSACTIONS EFFECTED BY THE AGREEMENT

Contract for sale of business– Wether contarct was concluded -

Whether defendant acted upon contract for sale of business -

Whether management contract was imtrim - Whether management contract was subsumed in agreement for sale 

WHETHER ADJUDICATION PROCESS SAME AS ARBITRATION

Jurisdiction  – Whether parties should return to arbitration –

Whether issue connected to matters settled at arbitration or

whether independent banker– Customer contract exists

Whether tender was accepted - Whether there is a  concluded contract - Whether defendant is estopped by its conduct from relying on certain clauses - Whether claimant entitled to damages - Whether the fact that vessell is not owned by claimant precludes a claim for damages - Whether claim for interest pursuant to the Law Reform (Miscallaneous Provisions) Act must be pleaded - Whether court has jurisdiction to entertain claim for interest after judgment delivered.

Whether arbitrator misconducted himself - Whether misconstruction of clauses constitute misconduct - Whether matter shuold be set aside or remitted.