Bijoux & Ors v Azemia & Ors (CN92/2016) [2020] SCSC 413 (13 January 2020)

Bijoux & Ors v Azemia & Ors (CN92/2016) [2020] SCSC 413 (13 January 2020)

The plaintiffs, as heirs, lacked standing to claim real rights in the house as such rights vest in the executor, not individual heirs, and there was no evidence of co-ownership or a valid droit de superficie in favour of Alice Azemia. The action should have been brought by the executor, and the property was not subject to co-ownership rules.

Citation
[2020] SCSC 413
Parties
Plaintiff: Claudette Azemia; Plaintiff: Jennifer Kilindo; Plaintiff: Sheila Fortin; Plaintiff: Ginette Boucharie; Plaintiff: Richard Azemia; Plaintiff: Philip Azemia; Plaintiff: Keven Azemia; Plaintiff: Marina Azemia; Defendant: Nellie Azemia; Defendant: Derick Azemia; Defendant: Marie-Antoinette Savy
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
13 January 2020
Case Number
CN92/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Inheritance, Executor's Capacity, Co Ownership, Droit De Superficie, Real Rights in Land
Source Language
English
Succession Property Law Inheritance Executor's Capacity Co Ownership Droit De Superficie Real Rights in Land

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claudette Azemia

Plaintiff

Jennifer Kilindo

Plaintiff

Sheila Fortin

Plaintiff

Ginette Boucharie

Plaintiff

Richard Azemia

Plaintiff

Philip Azemia

Plaintiff

Keven Azemia

Plaintiff

Marina Azemia

Plaintiff

Nellie Azemia

Defendant

Derick Azemia

Defendant

Marie-Antoinette Savy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have standing to claim a share in the house without the executor
  2. 2 Whether the property was subject to co-ownership or required action by the executor
  3. 3 Whether a droit de superficie existed in favour of Alice Azemia

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs, as heirs, lacked standing to claim real rights in the house as such rights vest in the executor, not individual heirs, and there was no evidence of co-ownership or a valid droit de superficie in favour of Alice Azemia. The action should have been brought by the executor, and the property was not subject to co-ownership rules.

Court Disposition

Plaint dismissed

Orders

  • Plaint dismissed against all defendants
  • No standing for plaintiffs as heirs without executor