JOSEPH DAHER v PETER CELESTIN

SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT (CIVIL) Suit No. 646 of 1992 Between: JOSEPH DAHER Pla if vs PETER CELESTIN De Mr. V. John for Plaintiff Mr. W. Hinkinson for the Defendant 1996: 1997: 24th 2nd 12th 7th January February March April JUDGMENT d'Auvergne, J Plaintiff brought an action against the Def cla ter alia arrears of rent, recision of the lease possession of his portion of land known as 'Corb Estate' situate at Grace, Vieux Fort. After many adjournments the matter was part heard and f heard on the 12th March, 1997. At the trial the Plaintiff gave evidence on s behalf and call Joseph Noel better known as Leonard Noel, the man who sold the land to him as a witness. The Defendant on the other hand gave evidence on s own behalf and called Arline Noel better known as Priscilla Noel, sister of Leonard Noel, the witness of the Plaintiff as a witness. At the trial the Plaintiff said that the piece of land stion was community property owned by his wife and him and ted the ster to the land - Block 1025B Parcel 28. He said that he bought the land from Joseph Noel also Leonard Noel in the year 1984 and soon after, " rented land to Mr. Celestin (the Defendant) for $1,000.00 per year." He further said that never rece any rental from the Defendant, that he sent him several Notices to Quit the anO s he wanted the land s own use, but to the Defendant remains in occupation of the land. r Cross Examination the Plaintiff stated most ica that he leased the portion of land in quest to De and that the latter was his tenant and not of e Evanus Noel nor t latter's daughter Arline Priscilla Noel. He said that he knew the land quest for was an oining owner, but after the sale, Joseph Leonard Noel to the land and showed him the boundaries; that he rented the exact portion of land bought, to the Defendant in the presence a witness named Levi. He said that he owns one and a half (11/2) carres or 3.00 hectares as can be verified by the exhibited land register. Joseph Noel, better known as Leonard Noel told the Court that sold one and a half (11/2) carres of land to the Plaintiff virtue of two Deeds of Sale) He said that he was the owner of that portion of land which he sold, that the land formerly belonged to his brother Emmanuel who rented to the Defendant; that after the said brother's h told the Defendant that he was the new owner of t piece of land he was then renting and that he should leave the land whi , his son who lived with him continued to occupy the 1 He further told the Court that after the sale of land to the Plaintiff he went to the Defendant, reminded s arrears of rental and that he should leave the land whereupon De old that he (Joseph Noel) did not own any land. He said after the Defendant said these words to iff Defendant that he had sold the land to the Pla not reply. told the Court he Under Cross Examination Joseph Noel land (14 acres 1 rood 7 inherited his brother's portion of the perches) owned by his father who had rcnes, 14 acres 1 out of his inheritance, which is half Plaintiff. This witness, to his nephew Lawrence Isidore and the however, strenuously denied that he sold more land than he owned. The Defendant told the Court that he knew the Pl iff and in question since he was lessee possession the 1 He denied however, that he was a tenant of the aintiff, but said that he was the tenant of Antoine Noel, the brother of Jos Noel; that he was in occupation of the land from 1973 at an rental of $1,000.00. He further said that he knew Arline Priscilla Noel who also ants on part of the land; that he received the various Notices to Quit from the Plaintiff but paid no heed to them since he was not a tenant of the Plaintiff. Under Cross Examination he reiterated his denial of being a tenant of the Plaintiff. ine Noel, better known as Priscilla Noel, said that fat owned four and a half (41/2) carres of land at Woodl also called 'Corbin Estate', and who, during s lifetime, d one and a half (11/2) carres out of the four and a half (41 2) carres. She said that the Defendant was the tenant of both her and herself, but that only her brother knew the amount of rental paid the Defendant. exhibited a copy of a Declaration of Success on f of mother who was married Communi ty of her father, Gregoire Evanus Noel. She confirmed that the Plaintiff owns part of t land s her brother Leonard sold to both the Plaintiff and Lawrence Is said that the problem being experienced the rema of the Noel family and the Plaintiff was because Leonard Noel d more land than he owned, and that at the hearing of a di e before the Land Tribunal, the Plaintiff was informed that Leonard Noel should refund him the purchase price of the land sold to concluded her evidence by saying that every six (6) months he t rental brother Antoine gave her $50.00 or more as her share paid by the Defendant. ARGUMENTS Learned Counsel for the Defendant argued that Gregoire Evanus Noel, father of Joseph Leonard Noel, Emmanuel Noel, Antoine Noel Arline Priscilla Noel, upon his death, owned an undivided 1/2 share of land containing 14 acres 1 rood and 7 perches which had been reduced by the sale of one and a half (11/2) carres, therefore he owned half share in approximately 10 acres to be divided amongst his four above mentioned children. Based on the above, he said that Joseph Leonard Noel sold more land than he owned and quoted the author Marler Carswell on Joint Ownership and urged the Court to dismiss matter. Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff commenced his argument stat that Learned Counsel for the Defendant argued the case as i was representing the other co-owners of the land question. al owed t He argued that the Defendant as tenant should not question the title of the Plaintiff, his landlord. He contended that the Plaintiff bought the land in quest from Noe rtue of two Deeds of Sale. Subsequent to the se of the land, there was a dispute between the Noels and the PIa iff referred to Land Adjudication Tribunal Dispute dated 1st 1 1 87 exhibited. He said that there was no dispute between owne of land Plaintiff and Defendant, the latter was a tenant of the and must pay the amount of rental owed and all other relief CONCLUSION This is a simple case of Landlord and Tenant. PIa iff is registered as the provisional owner of the land question, namely: Block & Parcel 1025 B 28 in the registration quarter Vieux Fort. I do not believe neither the Defendant who denies that he is the tenant of Plaintiff but of Antoine Noel, nor do I bel Arline Noel his witness who said that "My brother and I Mr. An Noel, placed Celes the Defendant on the land to be " and "that every six (6) months my brother Antoine gives me $50.00 odd when Defendant pays. " I find as a fact that Defendant is the tenant of the Plaintiff since the Plaintiff found him on the land but contracted with to lease the land to him at $1,000.00 per annum which he never paid. It is significant to note that Defendant states that he pays $1,000.00 per annum to Antoine Noel, yet rece $50.00 odd every six (6) months. It is trite law that "If a landlord lets a tenant o possess under a lease, then so long as the tenant rema possession sturbed by any adverse claim - then the tenant cannot di e the landlord's title." Industrial Properties (Barton Hill) Ltd vs Associated Electrical Industries Ltd (1977) Q B 580 at 596. As I see it, Arline Noel is using the De to iron out Noels' land dispute with the Plaintiff. The t, Land Adjudication Tribunal Dispute decis of 1st April 1987 cl states what has to be done. Based on the above my order is as follows: Defendant do pay to the Plaintiff twelve (12) years arrears rental at $1,000, total $12,000. ~ the Defendant do quit the land on or 31st I

1997.That Defendant do pay Costs to the Plaintiff to be or otherwise taxed . . . . . . . . . . . -'\ ........ .

SUZIE d'AUVERGNE

HIGH COURT JUDGE

Suit No. 646 of 1992 D’Auvergne, J Delivered: 17/04/97