SEPTIME DALSOU v VICTOR PAUL

.-" SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH ~OURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) Snit No . 397 of 1993 BEtween: SEPT:r:ME DALSOU Plaintiff vs VICTOR PAUL Defendant Mr . B. J. Allain for Plaintiff Mr. V. Gill for Defendant 1996: April 29th December 4. d'Auvergne, J By a writ of Summons indorsed with a Statement o f Claim dated the 25th June, 1993 and filed on the same day the Plaintiff s ought the following : (1) A declaration that the Plaintiff as Administrator i s the owner and legal ly entitled to the said parce l of l and registered in the Land Registry as Parcel 1422B 73 . (2) Possession of the part of the said portion o f l and of which the Defend~~t i s in possession. An order of injunction ad interim to restrain the Defendant by himself, his servants agent s otherwise from entering or rema ining on the Plaintiff 's said lands or any part thereof until fi nal determination of this Suit.

4) General damages for trespass. (5) The Costs hereof. On that same day the Plaintiff also fil an applicat an erim Injunction supported by an fidavit an unction o restrain the Defendant, QLS servants, agents lessees or otherwise from going upon, entering or upon t lands Plaintiff. On the 28th day of July 1993 an appearance was ent on f Defendant. On that same day the Interim Injunction on behalf aint was granted and it reads: It is hereby ordered upon the Plaint~ff's undertaking as ~o (1) That the Defendant is restrained from cont to build on the Plaintiff's land until further (2) Return day to be 22nd September 1993. On the 12th of August 1993 a defence and Counterclaim one set of eadings) was entered on behalf of the Defendant. The Defendant's defence is that a portion of the land was sold to by one of the heirs of Yvonne Dalsou namely Harold Dalsou and the Plaintiff was well aware of that sale. The Defendant's Counterclaim reads as follows: A declaration that he is the owner of the portion of land triangular in shape as per measurement stated on

his receipt. 2) An injunction to restrain the iff by If, Servants and/or agents from entering upon or on the Defendant's land. (3) Damages trespass. 4) The costs hereof. On the 29th September 1993 the injunction granted on t 28th of July 1993 was ordered lito continue unt determination the case of further order of the Court. II The matter came to trial on the 29th day April 1996. Learned Counsel for the Defendant told the Court that was the new Sclicitor for the Defendant and wished to make an amendment to paragraph 2 to the defence to insert after figurea 1988 lion the rection of and with the full knowledge the aintiff who is now estopped from ascertaining that the Defendant tt any breach which is denied as alleged or at 1." There was no objection to the amendment and it was Plaintiff gave evidence on his own behalf and told Court t he was one of the seven children of Yvonne Dalsou who owned a ece of land at Savannes, in the quarter of Vieux Fort, and which is registered as Parcel No. 1422B 73; that his mother died fourteen years IJ4) ago and on the 30th day of April 1993 he was granted Letters of Administration on her behalf and became Administrator of piece of land in question. The Deed of Sale of the land in question, the register of the said Deed of Sale and the Letters of Administration were all exhibited.

He said that he had the land surveyed in 1993 and a plan certified as a true copy dated 13th January 1993 known as record No. 23 of 1993 was also exhibited. The Plaintiff told the Court that the Defendant was no stranger ~o him for he is a maternal relative whom he has known for over years, that he, the Plaintiff lived in the United Kingdom years and returned to his home land St. Luc in the year 1977 and it was about five years ago that he observed the Defendant on the land; that he approached the Defendant concerning s whereupon the latter told him that he had bought the land from (Plaintiff's) brother Harold Dalsou and no one d stop him from entering and remaining on the land. The Plaintiff said that he was unaware of that sale to Defendant by Harold Dalsou and that he himself never promi ,at any time, to sell any land to the Defendant. He furth~r said that 1 was undivided and that the Defendant off the land since he (Defendant) is a trouble maker and that if his brother Harold was selling his share, ff would buy it so as to keep the land within family. Through the Cross Examination of the Plaintiff the Court became aware that after the death of Yvonne Dalsou (mentioned ier) relationship between the brothers, i. e. the aintiff and Harold Dalsou became estranged with the Defendant j on behalf of Harold against Plaintiff. The aintiff so told the Court that he saw the Defendant enter into the land built a plywood house and a concrete platform, a foundation for a second concrete structure. The Defendant on the other hand gave evidence and said that the aintiff was his double first cousin (children of two sisters who married two brothers) .

He further told the Court that he was the one who assisted his aunt Yvonne Dalsou when she was in the process of purchasing the lands at Savannes, and in return she sold to him a portion of the said l and which he in turn sold to Thomas Collymore and Barry Poyott.e s• (Deeds of Sale exhibited) . He also told the Court that during the month of December 1988 he approached the Plaintiff to sell to him the Plaint l ff's s hare in Parcel 1422B73 (Vieux Fort ) Whereupon the Plaintiff t old him that s ince he had children he would not be selling his portion but advised the Defendant to approach his brother Harold who was in the process of selling his share to one Rudolph St . Hi lli that he acted upon the advice of the Plaintiff and purchased Harold's portion of Parcel 1422B 73 (Vieux Fort) and he tendered a receipt of the t ransaction as an exhibit. He told the Court that he knew the extent of Harold's portion so a fter purchase he cleared the l and and placed h~_ :3 d'.'lelling h,ouse on t he land. He said that SOin after the Plaintiff began legal proceedings against him. Under Cross Examination he told the Court that his aunt had no t itle to the land before her purchase in 1981. Harold Dalsou confirmed the family relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and his selling of his portion of Parcel 1422B 73 to the Defendant by receipt i nstead o f by deed of s ale since the land was not partitioned. Under Cross Examination this witness inslsted that he knew his portion of land since his mother had shown him what was to be his portion. This witness was extensively questioned by the Court since there appeared to be many inconsistencies with regard the receipt tendered.

CONCLUSION This is a simple case of one heir selling undivided land by receipt. On the 29th day of Apri l 1996 I delivered a verbal j udgment and advised the parties in t erms o f t he order now being made. As stated earlier there i s bad b1 2 ~d between t he Plaintiff, his brother Harold and the Defendant, but I f ind a s a f act that Defendant has a valid i nterest in the l and, Parcel 1422B 73 quarter o f Vieux Fort since he s tepped i nto the s hoes of Harold. This beLlg so I hereby declare that the Plaint i ff i s the Administrator of t he port i on of l and at Savannes Estate Vieux Fort known as Parcel 1422B73 on behalf of: Mary Anna Prince nee Paul Benoit Paul Victor Paul Alexandrine Haynes nee Dalsou Caulita Jankie nee Dalsou Helen Tobierre nee Dalsou Septime Dalsou That the Interim Injunction granted to t he Plaintiff restraining t he Defendant from continuing to build on the said lands unt i l the determination of the case is to continue until t he l and is partitioned or further order. There will be no order as to Costs. ~ \ ~~ ~~ .. ' ~~,

.-” SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH ~OURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) Snit No . 397 of 1993 BEtween: SEPT:r:ME DALSOU vs VICTOR PAUL Mr . B. J. Allain for Plaintiff Mr. V. Gill for Defendant 1996: d’Auvergne, J April 29th December 4. Plaintiff Defendant By a writ of Summons indorsed with a Statement o f Claim dated the 25th June, 1993 and filed on the same day the Plaintiff s ought the following : (1) A declaration that the Plaintiff as Administrator i s the owner and legally entitled to the said parce l of l and registered in the Land Registry as Parcel 1422B 73 . (2) Possession of the part of the said portion o f l and of which the Defend~~t i s in possession. (3) An order of injunction ad interim to restrain the Defendant by himself, his servants or agent s or otherwise from entering or rema ining on the Plaintiff 's said lands or any

part thereof until fi nal determination of this Suit. 4) General damages for trespass. (5) The Costs hereof. On that same day the Plaintiff also fil an applicat an erim Injunction supported by an fidavit an unction o restrain the Defendant, QLS servants, agents lessees or otherwise from going upon, entering or upon t lands Plaintiff. On the 28th day of July 1993 an appearance was ent on f Defendant. On that same day the Interim Injunction on behalf was granted and it reads: It is hereby ordered upon the Plaint~ff’s undertaking as ~o aint (1) That the Defendant is restrained from cont to build on the Plaintiff’s land until further (2) Return day to be 22nd September 1993. On the 12th of August 1993 a defence and Counterclaim one set of eadings) was entered on behalf of the Defendant. The Defendant’s defence is that a portion of the land was sold to by one of the heirs of Yvonne

Dalsou namely Harold Dalsou and the Plaintiff was well aware of that sale. The Defendant’s Counterclaim reads as follows: (1) A declaration that he is the owner of the portion of land triangular in shape as per measurement stated on 2 his receipt. 2) An injunction to restrain the iff by If, Servants and/or agents from entering upon or on the Defendant’s land. (3) Damages trespass. 4) The costs hereof. On the 29th September 1993 the injunction granted on t 28th of July 1993 was ordered lito continue unt determination the case of further order of the Court. II The matter came to trial on the 29th day April 1996. Learned Counsel for the Defendant told the Court that was the new Sclicitor for the Defendant and wished to make an amendment to paragraph 2 to the defence to insert after figurea 1988 lion the rection of and with the full knowledge the aintiff who is now estopped from ascertaining

that the Defendant tt any breach which is denied as alleged or at 1.” There was no objection to the amendment and it was Plaintiff gave evidence on his own behalf and told Court t he was one of the seven children of Yvonne Dalsou who owned a ece of land at Savannes, in the quarter of Vieux Fort, and which is registered as Parcel no 1422B 73; that his mother died fourteen years IJ4) ago and on the 30th day of April 1993 he was granted Letters of Administration on her behalf and became Administrator of piece of land in question. the Deed of Sale of the land in question, the register of the said Deed of Sale and the Letters of Administration were all exhibited. 3 He said that he had the land surveyed in 1993 and a plan certified as a true copy dated 13th January 1993 known as record No. 23 of 1993 was also exhibited.

The Plaintiff told the Court that the Defendant was no stranger ~o him for he is a maternal relative whom He has known for over years, that he the Plaintiff lived in the United Kingdom years and returned to his home land St. Luc in the year 1977 and it was about five years ago that he observed the Defendant on the land; that he approached the Defendant concerning s whereupon the latter told him that he had bought the land from (Plaintiff’s) brother Harold Dalsou and no one d stop him from entering and remaining on the land. the Plaintiff said that he was unaware of that sale to Defendant by Harold Dalsou and that he himself never promi ,at any time, to sell any land to the Defendant He furth~r said that 1 was undivided and that the Defendant off the land since he (Defendant) is a trouble maker and that if his brother Harold was selling his

share, ff would buy it so as to keep the land within family. Through the Cross Examination of the Plaintiff, the Court became aware that after the death of Yvonne Dalsou (mentioned ier) relationship between the brothers, i e. the aintiff and, Harold Dalsou became estranged with the Defendant j on behalf of Harold. against Plaintiff. The aintiff so told the Court that he saw the Defendant enter into the land built a plywood house and a concrete platform, a foundation for a second concrete structure. The Defendant on the other hand gave evidence and said That the aintiff was his double first cousin (children of two sisters who married two brothers) . 4 he further told the Court that he was the one who assisted his aunt Yvonne Dalsou when she was in the process of purchasing the lands at Savannes, and in return she sold to him a portion of the said l and which he in turn

sold to Thomas Collymore and Barry Poyott.e s• (Deeds of Sale exhibited) . He also told the Court that during the month of December 1988 he a pproached the Plaintiff to sell to him the Plaint l ff’s share in Parcel 1422B73 (Vieux Fort ) Whereupon the Plaintiff t old him that s ince he had children he would not be selling his portion but advised the Defendant to approach his brother Harold who was in the process of selling his share to one Rudolph St . Hi lli that he acted upon the advice of the Plaintiff and purchased Harold’s portion of Parcel 1422B 73 (Vieux Fort) and he tendered a receipt of the t ransaction as an exhibit. He told the Court that he knew the extent of Harold’s portion so a fter purchase he cleared the l and and placed h~_ :3 d’.’lelling h,ouse on t he land. He said that SOin after the Plaintiff began legal

proceedings against him. Under Cross Examination he told the Court that his aunt had no t itle to the land before her purchase in 1981. Harold Dalsou confirmed the family relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and his sel ling of his portion of Parcel 1422B 73 to the Defendant by receipt i nstead o f by deed of s ale since the land was not partitioned. Under Cross Examination this witness inslsted that he knew his portion of land since his mother had shown him what was to be his portion. This witness was extensively questioned by the Court since there appeared to be many inconsistencies with regard the receipt tendered. 5 CONCLUSION This is a simple case of one heir selling undivided land by receipt. On the 29th day o f Apri l 1996 I delivered a verbal j udgment and advised the parties in t erms o f t he order now being made. As stated

earlier there i s bad b1 2 ~d between t he Plaintiff, his brother Harold and the Defendant, but I f ind a s a f act that Defendant has a valid i nterest in the l and, Parcel 1422B 73 quarter o f Vieux Fort since he s tepped i nto the s hoes o f Harold. This beLlg so I hereby declare that the Plain t i ff i s the Administrator of t he port i on of l and at Savannes Estate Vieux Fort known as Parcel 1422B73 on behalf of: Mary Anna Prince nee Paul Benoit Paul Victor Paul Alexandrine Haynes nee Dalsou Caulita Jankie nee Dalsou Helen Tobierre nee Dalsou Septime Dalsou That the Interim Injunction granted to t he Plaintiff restraining t he Defendant from continuing to build on the said lands unt i l the determination of the case is to continue until t he l and is partitioned or further order.

There will be no order as to Costs. ~ \ ~~ ~~ .. ‘ ~~, SUZIE D’AUVERGNE PUSINE JUDGE · ·· “·”.. . ‘ ·’,~:·:~~.7:-z ·;·~,,-. -; ….. ·: l .. ‘:” : ” I~’~””‘;””” ~-” ” 6