Lesperance v Rose (CS 105/2020) [2022] SCSC 1061 (31 January 2022)

Lesperance v Rose (CS 105/2020) [2022] SCSC 1061 (31 January 2022)

The plaintiff suffered detriment by paying for the property entirely from her own funds while the defendant was unjustly enriched by being registered as joint owner without contribution, with no lawful cause or alternative remedy available.

Citation
[2022] SCSC 1061
Parties
Plaintiff: Lisette Lesperance; Defendant: Robert Emilson Rose
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
31 January 2022
Case Number
CS 105/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed
Legal Topics
Co Ownership, Immovable Property, Common Law Relationship, Action De in Rem Verso
Source Language
English
Property Law Unjust Enrichment Co Ownership Immovable Property Common Law Relationship Action De in Rem Verso

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisette Lesperance

Plaintiff

Robert Emilson Rose

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was unjustly enriched to the detriment of the plaintiff by being registered as joint owner of parcel C5614 despite not contributing to its purchase or improvement.

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff suffered detriment by paying for the property entirely from her own funds while the defendant was unjustly enriched by being registered as joint owner without contribution, with no lawful cause or alternative remedy available.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed

Orders

  • Defendant to transfer parcel C5614 into plaintiff's sole name within 14 days of judgment.
  • If defendant fails, Registrar of Lands to remove defendant as joint owner and register plaintiff as sole owner of parcel C5614.