Where a matter is heard in Mauritius
The courts, tribunals and offices that hear common matters in Mauritius, each with the provision that gives it the matter, quoted from the Act, and the time limit where the Act states one.
Ministry of Labour: conciliation by the supervising officer
A labour dispute between a worker and an employer, before it is reported to the President of the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation.
Employment Relations Tribunal (ERT)
Labour disputes referred to it for arbitration, and the other matters the Employment Relations Act gives it.
Industrial Court
Prosecutions for employment offences, including an employer paying less than the minimum remuneration fixed by Remuneration Regulations.
District Court, small claims procedure
A money claim brought under Part IIA of the District and Intermediate Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Act.
District Court or Intermediate Court (ordinary civil)
Ordinary civil claims, including a landlord's action to cancel a lease or to recover possession of property from a tenant or occupier.
Environment and Land Use Appeal Tribunal (ELUAT)
Appeals under the Environment Protection Act, against a decision of a Municipal City, Municipal Town or District Council under the Local Government Act, under the Morcellement Act, and under the Town and Country Planning Act.
Equal Opportunities Commission
A written complaint that a right under the Equal Opportunities Act has been infringed, that is, an alleged act of discrimination.
Data Protection Commissioner
A complaint that the Data Protection Act 2017, or regulations under it, has been, is being, or is about to be contravened.
Competition Commission
Restrictive business practices: the Commission determines whether one is occurring or has occurred, and what penalty or remedy to impose.
Ombudsman
Injustice suffered through maladministration by a government department, the Police Force, the Prisons Service and the other officers and authorities section 97 applies to.
What this page does not list
- Family matters: divorce, custody, maintenance: These are heard by the Family Division of the Supreme Court. No provision constituting that Division has been read verbatim, and family matters are where a wrong forum costs a layperson the most, so juris does not route them. The Case Companion declines to show similar cases for the same four kinds of matter.
- The 'prescribed amount' that separates the District Court from the Intermediate Court: Courts Act s. 2 defines it as 'such sum as the President may, by regulations, determine'. Those regulations are not in this corpus: subsidiary legislation coverage runs 2024 to 2026 only. So juris states no money limit for the ordinary civil courts, and says which court only where the provision itself does. Every secondary source that quotes a figure here is quoting an instrument we have not read.
- Employment claim time limits: The periods for lodging an employment claim are in the Workers' Rights Act 2019. It is in the corpus only as enacted (Act No 20 of 2019, not consolidated) and no provision of it has been read verbatim for this file. Every employment forum above therefore carries time_limit: null, and the surface must say so at the point of the gap.
- Consumer Affairs Unit, and complaints under the Consumer Protection Act 1991: The Consumer Protection Act 1991 and the Consumer Protection (Price and Supplies Control) Act 1998 are both in this corpus, but no provision constituting a complaints route to the Consumer Affairs Unit was read verbatim, so no forum entry was written. Consumer money claims are routed to the small claims procedure instead, whose basis is quoted above.
- Fair Rent Tribunal: It has entertained no application made on or after 1 January 2021. Routing a current tenancy matter to it would send a citizen to a body that will not hear them.
- Appeals from every forum above: This page answers where a matter starts. Appeal routes and their periods are in the deadline calculator, which carries only the appellate provisions whose text has been read word for word.
This page is legal information, not legal advice. juris never predicts how a matter will be decided. Check the source before you rely on a passage.