Daniel v Daniel
| Jurisdiction | Trinidad & Tobago |
| Judge | Seepersad, J. |
| Judgment Date | 11 February 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | TT 2016 HC 120 |
| Docket Number | CV 2008-02860 |
| Court | High Court (Trinidad and Tobago) |
| Date | 11 February 2016 |
High Court
Seepersad, J.
CV 2008-02860
1. Ms. R. Ramjit for the claimant
2. Ms. D. Palackdharrysingh for the defendant
Civil practice and procedure - Registered conveyancing — Whether the issued certificate should have been cancelled on the basis that it was obtained by fraud — Whether there was a family agreement for the deceased to act on behalf of his siblings — Whether the doctrine of laches should have been applied so as to disentitle the claimant from pursuing any remedy before the court.
This action concerns a parcel of land in which a Certificate of Title Volume 4488 Folio 159 was issued in the name of Leigh Hunte Daniel on the 18th August 2003 pursuant to the provisions of the Real Property Ordinance.
The land was previously occupied by Edward Ebenezer Daniel who was also called Lee Hunt Daniel also called Lee Hunte Daniel, the father of Lee Hunte Daniel and the claimant. Edward Daniel however, did not have title to the said land and he died on or about the 19th day of July, 1957. A Deed of Assent registered as No. 2570 of 1970 was executed by Eliza Elvira Daniel, his Widow and Administratrix and this Deed of Assent, purported to transfer ownership of one-third of the land in question to Eliza Elvira Daniel and a two-third interest in the said land to Lee Hunte Daniel, DeVerteuil Daniel, Viviette Harry, Mitcheline Daniel, Theresa Daniel and Eloiza Daniel. This Deed however did not effectively transfer of ownership of the land as same did not belong to the estate.
The land was in fact owned by Charles Henry Bradshaw, who in his Will, left a portion of same to Maggie Percy, the mother of Edward Ebenezer Daniel. There is no evidence that there was a transfer of ownership of this portion of the land to Maggie Percy or to Edward Ebenezer Daniel.
Lee Hunt Daniel died on the 4th day of February, 1997 and prior to his death he made an application for the Certificate of Title with respect to the said land. The defendant Ruthven Daniel is Lee Hunt Daniel's son and the Executor of his father's estate.
The claimant's case is that sometime around the year 1963 there was an agreement between her and her other siblings with her deceased brother Lee Hunt Daniel, that he would deal with all legal matters pertaining to their father's estate and would distribute the said lands between all the siblings in accordance with the well known wishes of their father.
The claimant's pleaded case was that in pursuance of the aforesaid agreement, certain monies were given to Lee Hunt Daniel by the siblings and a family parcel of land in Patience Hill Tobago was sold and a portion of the proceeds of the sale was given to Lee Hunt for the purpose of sorting out the title to the said lands and for the distribution of same.
The claimant contends that on March 30, 2008, her siblings received information that the defendant had obtained a document which transferred the entire parcel of the said land to Lee Hunt Daniel and on the same day her siblings also received information that the defendant was subdividing the land in preparation to sell parcels of same.
In April 2008 the claimant's Attorney caused a search to be done which revealed that Lee Hunt Daniel had made an application to bring the lands under the RPO which was granted. As a result of the search, the claimant received documents which she alleged contained fraudulent signatures of her and her four siblings.
The pivotal allegations of fraud pleaded by the claimant are as follows:
-
a) That Lee Hunt Daniel lied in a statutory declaration when he swore that:
-
a. There were no other persons with a claim or interest in the said lands
-
b. All the siblings (including the claimant) abandoned possession of the land since attaining their ages of majority in the 1950's.
-
c. That all the beneficiaries had acknowledged his right to possession of the said lands and were not interested in the said lands.
-
-
b) That Lee Hunt Daniel tendered the following documents as evidence in his RPO application which contained fraudulent signatures:
-
a. A document dated November 12, 1991 purportedly signed by five persons including the claimant the purport of which was to the effect that they abandoned and renounced their rights to the said lands.
-
b. A document dated August 27, 1990 purportedly signed by five persons including the claimant which indicated that they gave their consent to Lee Hunt Daniel to apply to bring the lands under the RPO.
-
c. A document dated January 22, 1992 purportedly signed by five persons including the claimant, whereby they attested to the accuracy of the document dated November 12, 1991.
-
The claimant's case is that she has been deprived of the use and enjoyment of her share in the disputed land and her other siblings have also been so deprived.
Further the claimant's case is that in reliance of the representation made to her by her brother Lee Hunt Daniel in 1995 regarding the disputed land being shared equally between all the siblings, her son Donlyn Daniel with the consent of Lee Hunt Daniel built a house on a portion of the said land which was identified by Lee Hunt Daniel and she further contended that the true intention as well as the family agreement with her brother Lee Hunt Daniel was reflected in his Last Will and Testament dated March 08, 1995.
The defendant admitted that there was a Deed of Assent registered as No. 2570 of 1970 but stated that Edward Ebenezer Daniel also known as Gurrie Daniel did not lawfully own the parcel of land described therein and it did not lawfully comprise part of his estate therefore, the Deed of Assent did not pass any title in the said land. The land according to the defendant was actually owned by Charles Henry Bradshaw and Louis Plageman subsequently had control over the lands as executor of Henry Bradshaw's estate and that the land would not have been assented and conveyed by Eloiza Daniel.
The defendant stated that he spoke to the claimant since 2004 and informed her that he was in possession of the Certificate Title and that it was in his father's name only. The defendant said he was also in contact with Oslyn Harry, the son of Vivet Harry and directly with Dowaga Daniel from time to time and he always told them about the progress he had made with Town and Country Planning. This was done although the land was in the name of Lee Hunt Daniel. The defendant stated that the application to bring the lands under the RPO was published in 1993 in the daily newspapers and the claimant had proper notice of the application.
In relation to the allegations of fraud the defendant pleaded that he was unable to admit or deny the particulars of fraud as set out in the pleadings since it was impossible for him to know the intentions of Lee Hunt Daniel however the defendant advanced that to the best of his knowledge, Lee Hunt Daniel at all material times acted honestly and believed the representations he made. Further, the defendant said that Lee Hunt Daniel had reasonable grounds to believe and did believe up to the time of his death that the said representations were true and he puts the claimant to the strict proof of all the particulars of fraud as detailed in the Amended Statement of Case.
The defendant's case therefore was that his father did not become the owner of the disputed land by fraud as alleged
In addition the defendant stated that the claimant acquiesced to the title of the said land being vested in Lee Hunt Daniel, by virtue of her inaction and she was not entitled to the reliefs sought.
In the matter the claimant sought the following orders:
-
a. A declaration that the said Certificate of Title issued on 18th August 2003 under the provisions of the Real Property Ordinance Ch 27 No. 11 be cancelled.
-
b. A declaration that the named defendant holds on trust for the claimant a one-seventh share in the said lands described in the Certificate of Title issued on 18th August 2003.
-
c. An order that the named defendant do transfer to the claimant the one-seventh share of the said lands.
-
d. A declaration that the claimant be declared the fee simple owner of that portion of the said lands representing a one-seventh of the said portion of lands.
-
e. An order for possession of that portion of the said lands which represents as one-seventh share of the said portion of lands.
-
f. A quia timet injunction that the defendant be hereby restrained from selling or developing the said parcel of land which is represented as one-seventh each of the said portion of lands rightfully belonging to the claimant.
-
g. An injunction prohibiting the defendant or his servants or agents be restrained from entering upon the said portion of lands rightfully owned by the claimant.
-
h. Specific performance of the contract.
-
i. Damages for breach of contract in lieu of or in addition to specific performance.
-
j. In the alternative, an order compelling the defendant to do the deed(s) of assent vesting in the claimant a one-seventh share or interest in the said lands in accordance with the bequests in the Will of the deceased Lee Hunt Daniel.
-
k. A declaration that at clause 5 of his Last Will and Testament the deceased, Lee Hunt Daniel, intended to and did in fact carry out the family agreement thus entitling each of his siblings to one-seventh share in the said lands.
-
I. Costs
-
m. Interest at such rate and for such period as to the Court seems fit.
-
n. Such other or further relief that the Court deems fit.
The issues to be determined are as follows:
-
i. Whether the issued certificate of title should be cancelled on the basis that same was obtained by fraud.
-
ii. Whether there was a family agreement that Lee Hunt Daniel would act on behalf of his siblings so as to ensure that they all...
To continue reading
Request your trial