Mauritius – Constitutional law. The appellant company's appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, on the basis that its constitutional rights had been breached and further that it had not been required to establish 'faute lourde' was dismissed. The case was a claim for damages, concerning the alleged wrongful detention of the claimant's goods by the State of Mauritius and the Mauritius Revenue Authority. The Privy Council held that any alleged infringements of constitutional rights had to first be the subject of a claim for redress under s 17(1) of the Constitution and the appellant had failed to do so. Further, the appellant had failed to establish 'faute lourde' as required.