Barbara Constantine Acting herein by her lawful attorney on Record Jim Lockhart Plaintiff v Eric Hackshaw Defendant [ECSC]
| Jurisdiction | St Vincent and the Grenadines |
| Judge | Mitchell, J |
| Judgment Date | 31 May 2000 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [2000] ECSC J0531-10 |
| Court | High Court (Saint Vincent) |
| Date | 31 May 2000 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL SUIT NO.482 OF 1993 |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CIVIL SUIT NO.482 OF 1993
Mrs Margaret Hughes-Ferrari for the Plaintiff
Othneil R Sylvester QC CMG, Ms Nicole Sylvester with him, for the Defendant
This is a dispute over the ownership of a parcel of land at Queen's Drive in Cane Hall in St Vincent and the Grenadines (hereinafter "the Land"). The Land measures some 4 acres and 30 poles. The Plaintiff holds a 1970 Deed of Gift to the Land, while the Defendant holds a 1993 possessory title to the same Land.
The Pleadings: By a Statement of Claim filed on 10 November 1993, the Plaintiff claimed that she was the owner in possession the Land at Cane Hall in St Vincent. Her predecessor in title was her father Frank Constantine who had acquired the Land in 1968. He had given it to her by deed of gift in 1970. From about 1972 the Land had been under the management and control of Jim Lockhart who had planted fruit trees on the Land. In about 1984, Jim Lockhart had permitted the Defendant to cut cedar trees for burning charcoal and growing cash crops on about one acre of the Land on condition that the Defendant gave him 1/3 of the produce from the Land. Sometime in 1985, on the instructions of Jim Lockhart, a small wooden storage shack had been erected on the Land by the Defendant. Jim Lockhart had supplied some of the materials for the construction of the building. Also in 1985, the Defendant had begun to rear sheep on part of the Land for Jim Lockhart. For this purpose, part of the perimeter of the Land had been fenced. In 1990, Jim Lockhart had commenced enquiries to purchase the Land from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff and Jim Lockhart had come to an agreement in November of that year. Immediately after the agreement of sale was made, Jim Lockhart had told the Defendant of it. The Defendant had requested that he be sold a portion of the Land. This had been agreed by Jim Lockhart. The Defendant had thereupon applied to and obtained a loan from the St Vincent Building and Loan Association with which to purchase the portion. In about August 1991, Jim Lockhart had permitted the Defendant to occupy the shack temporarily until he found other accommodation. In about the month of November 1991, while Jim Lockhart was out of St Vincent on holiday in Canada, the Defendant had constructed a second shack on a part of the Land he had bulldozed without the permission of Jim Lockhart. On his return to St Vincent, Jim Lockhart had demanded that the second shack be dismantled. The Defendant had refused to do so. At the time of the filing of the writ, the Defendant had been using the shack as a retail outlet and for the unlawful selling of alcohol. In about the month of February 1993, Jim Lockhart had had the Land surveyed. The Defendant had assisted in the exercise by locating the boundary markers. Jim Lockhart had been considered by the Defendant and all owners of adjoining lands to be the person in possession of the Land. Until November 1992, the Defendant had given 1/3 of all the produce from his cultivation of the Land to Jim Lockhart. In 1992, the Defendant had fraudulently registered a Solemn Declaration claiming possessory title to the Land. The Declaration was fraudulent because he had admitted the fact that he was caretaker of the Land to the police at Calliaqua in July and September 1993. The Plaintiff claimed possession of the Land, damages for trespass, an injunction against the Defendant, and cancellation of the Defendant's deed.
Eventually, on 5 May 1994, with leave of the court, a Defence and Counterclaim was served and filed. The Defendant denied the various claims of the Plaintiff. He pleaded that he had been in possession of the Land at all material times. From the year 1970, he had begun to treat the Land as his own. He denied that Jim Lockhart had planted fruit trees on the Land or had given him permission to cut cedar trees or to grow crops, or that he had given Jim Lockhart a portion of the produce. He denied that Jim Lockhart had supplied materials for the structures on the Land. He had built the first house on the Land in 1969. By 1985 he had two other houses on the Land, one rented and the other lived in by the Defendant. From the year 1970, he had begun to rear animals on the Land. In the year 1982, he had enclosed a portion of the Land at his own expense and with his own labour for the purpose of rearing his sheep. He denied that the sheep belonged to Jim Lockhart. In 1990, he had bulldozed a portion of the Land and subsequently built a concrete block building on it. In 1989, Jim Lockhart had made enquiries of the Defendant as to the original owner of the Land. In 1991, Jim Lockhart had approached the Defendant and suggested that he would join with the Defendant to develop the Land and sell off portions of the Land for housing and together they could make money from the Land. He had suggested that he, Jim Lockhart, would pay the expense of the survey and development of the Land, and they would share in the profits from the Land. At all material times, he had been operating a refreshment outlet for non-alcoholic beverages. He had only begun to sell alcohol after he obtained a licence. The Defendant had at first permitted Jim Lockhart to carry out the survey. After the survey, Jim Lockhart had informed him that he had purchased the Land from the Plaintiff, and that he would give him an acre of the Land or build a house on it and sell him a portion of the Land cheaply if he would vacate the rest. The Defendant had not pursued the loan, which had been approved for the joint development of the Land, as it was clear then that the suggestions were not bona fide and were false and intended to entrap the Defendant. The Defendant had stopped Jim Lockhart from carrying out the survey and had requested him not to trespass on the Land. Jim Lockhart had clandestinely brought onto the Land a container which he deposited near to the shop. The Defendant had been in exclusive and uninterrupted possession of the Land since the year 1970. He had made a Statutory Declaration and registered it in 1993. He had written to Colin Alexander requesting him to desist from entering and trespassing on the Lands. Jim Lockhart had persisted in the early part of 1993 in trespassing in the Land. In July 1993, Jim Lockhart had come into the Defendant's shop and abused the Defendant. The Defendant had caused his solicitors to write to Jim Lockhart requesting him to desist from trespassing. The Defendant counterclaimed. He claimed that on 11 March 1994, Jim Lockhart and 4 men had come onto the Land while the Defendant had been away from the Land and had pushed down the Defendant's concrete wall, broken down a shed on the Land, and had destroyed a florescent lamp and a radiator. He claimed the cost of rebuilding the wall, of the shed, the lamp and the radiator, to a total of EC$3,951.08. He also claimed general damages and an injunction.
The Defendant requested particulars of the Statement of Claim. From the filed particulars, it appeared the Plaintiff was claiming that she took possession of the Land on the same day that it was conveyed to her. This possession had been exercised through Jim Lockhart who lived nearby and visited the Land regularly. Jim Lockhart had been the agent for the Land since the time of the Plaintiff's father Frank Constantine. The Land had been under the management and control of Jim Lockhart since about Easter Monday 1972. Jim Lockhart had managed and controlled the Land by preventing squatters; arranging for its cleaning and cultivation by the Defendant; receiving parts of the produce from the Defendant; farming the Land; and verifying that the Land taxes were paid. The particulars claimed that Jim Lockhart had planted mango, breadfruit, avocado, and coconut trees. A man called "Sam" and the Defendant under Jim Lockhart's direction planted the trees. Some of these trees had been blown down since. The permission given by Jim Lockhart to the Defendant to cut cedar trees had been orally made in about May 1984. Eddoes and sweet potatoes had been grown on the Land. The agreement to share had been oral and made on the Land in the presence of the Defendant and Jim Lockhart. The share had been given from 1985 up to November 1992. The amount had varied according to the crops reaped. Jim Lockhart had reaped as and when he needed. The Defendant, who was Jim Lockhart's gardener for a time, had brought produce to Jim Lockhart's house. The storage shack had been built in around 1987. Jim Lockhart had contributed 3 rolls of fence wire, barbed wire, staples and a come-along. Glory cedar posts were used, and a white dragon fence was planted on about 4/5 of the western boundary along the public road. On Jim Lockhart's instructions, one Joel Hall had carried the fence wire and other materials from Jim Lockhart's factory at Campden Park to the Land. The sheep had been bought by the Defendant in about 1987 with money supplied by Jim Lockhart. After about 2 years, the Defendant reported that the sheep had disappeared, and, as a consequence, Jim Lockhart had abandoned his sheep rearing venture. About 1 1/2 acres of the Land had been fenced. The bulldozing of part of the Land had been done by the Defendant on the instructions of Jim Lockhart in about October 1990 while Jim Lockhart was out of the country. Jim Lockhart had agreed to sell the Defendant 14,379 sq ft at $5.00 per sq ft, and 25,485 sq ft at $1.00 per sq ft. Among the owners of adjoining lands and other persons in the neighbourhood, who considered Jim Lockhart to have been in possession of the Land, the Plaintiff named Adolph Veira, St Vincent Electricity Services; Brian Glasgow, Ken Lewis, PJ Lewis, Ira Young and Marc Cumberbatch.
On 22 June 1994, the Plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial