Barbe v Belize (CS 61/2003) [2004] SCSC 32 (29 March 2004)

Barbe v Belize (CS 61/2003) [2004] SCSC 32 (29 March 2004)

The Respondent was a licensee, not a tenant, and her continued occupation after revocation of the licence is illegal. She has no serious defence, and the Applicant is entitled to exclusive possession of his property.

Citation
[2004] SCSC 32
Parties
Applicant: Barbe; Respondent: Belize
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
29 March 2004
Case Number
CS 61/2003
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application for Writ Habere Facias Possessionem
Outcome
Petition allowed; writ granted
Legal Topics
Eviction, Licence Vs Tenancy, Statutory Tenancy, Writ of Habere Facias Possessionem
Source Language
English
Property Law Equity Eviction Licence Vs Tenancy Statutory Tenancy Writ of Habere Facias Possessionem

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barbe

Applicant

Belize

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application for Writ Habere Facias Possessionem

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent is in illegal occupation of the Applicant's property
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent is a tenant or merely a licensee
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent is entitled to protection under the Control of Rent and Tenancy Agreement Act

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent was a licensee, not a tenant, and her continued occupation after revocation of the licence is illegal. She has no serious defence, and the Applicant is entitled to exclusive possession of his property.

Court Disposition

Petition allowed; writ granted

Orders

  • Respondent to leave, quit and vacate the house on or before 30 June 2004
  • No order as to costs