Roslyn Burton Appellant v Bertillia Christopher Respondent [ECSC]

• Jurisdiction: Dominica
• Judge: d'Auvergne J. A. (Ag.):,d'Auvergne J. A. (Ag.),Suzie d'Auvergne,Albert Redhead,Justice of Appeal
• Judgment Date: 16 March 2001
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2001] ECSC J0316-1
• Court: Court of Appeal (Dominica)
• Docket Number: APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2000
• Date: 16 March 2001

[2001] ECSC J0316-1

IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN COURT OF APPEAL

HIGH COURT CIVIL

Before:

The Honourable Mr. Albert Redhead Justice of Appeal

The Honourable Mr. Albert Matthew Justice of Appeal

The Honourable Miss Suzie d'Auvergne Justice of Appeal (Ag.)

APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2000

Between:

Roslyn Burton

Appellant

and

Bertillia Christopher

Respondent

Appearances:

Dr. William E. Riviere for the Appellant

Mr. Davidson E. Baptiste for the Respondent

1 d'Auvergne J. A. (Ag.): Having listened to both parties during their presentations, we have arrived at the conclusion that the earliest time upon which ""Adverse Possession" would begin to run in favour of the Respondent would be from the year 1994, just after the last payment of rent by her to Davidson Riviere.

d'Auvergne J. A. (Ag.)

2 We disagree with Learned Counsel for the Respondent that "Adverse Possession" could have begun in 1983 when the Respondent entered the land as a paying tenant.

3 In the recent cases namelyNo. 4 of 2000 (St Vincent and the Grenadines) Errol Davis vs Timothy Nelson and No. 7 of 2000 Civil Appeal (St. Vincent and the Grenadines)Cora Matthews vs Sonia Patterson the Court said quoting from Halsbury's Laws of England 4^th Edition Vol. 28 para 979.

"For there to be Adverse Possession the person claiming possession should have the necessaryanimus possidendi, that is an intention to possess the land to the exclusion of all other persons including the owner with the paper title so far as is reasonable and so far as the process of law will allow…….."

4 InPollard v Dick 20ECS Law Reports 239 at 242 Davis C.J giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal pointed out that the person who sought to dispossess must first obtain "possession animus possidendi, that is occupation with the intention of excluding the owner as well as other people."

5 From what Learned Counsel for the Appellant read out to us fromClerk v Lindsell on Tort 17^th Edition there must be a "Corpus" and the intention for there to be adverse possession and it cannot be said that when the Respondent entered the land in 1983 as a paying tenant of Mr. Davidson Riviere, the maternal uncle of the Appellant, that she had the intention to possess the land to the exclusion of all other persons. (Mr. Davidson Riviere included).

6 The case ofMoses v Lovegrove 1952 1AER page 1277 was considered. It is our view that the facts of that case do not deal with matters related to the facts...