Lesperance v Rose (CS 07/2018) [2020] SCSC 515 (9 June 2020)

Lesperance v Rose (CS 07/2018) [2020] SCSC 515 (9 June 2020)

The Plaintiff failed to plead or prove unjust enrichment and did not bring the correct action for termination of co-ownership. The Court cannot grant relief on an unpleaded cause of action, and the Plaintiff did not satisfy the legal requirements for unjust enrichment.

Citation
[2020] SCSC 515
Parties
Plaintiff: Lisette Lesperance; Defendant: Robert Rose
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
9 June 2020
Case Number
CS 07/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Co Ownership, Termination of Joint Ownership, Unjust Enrichment, Concubinage
Source Language
English
Property Law Family Law Co Ownership Termination of Joint Ownership Unjust Enrichment Concubinage

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

Parties

Lisette Lesperance

Plaintiff

Robert Rose

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to sole ownership of land Parcel C5614 and the house thereon
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff has established grounds for termination of co-ownership under Seychelles law

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to plead or prove unjust enrichment and did not bring the correct action for termination of co-ownership. The Court cannot grant relief on an unpleaded cause of action, and the Plaintiff did not satisfy the legal requirements for unjust enrichment.

Court Disposition

Plaint dismissed

Orders

  • The Plaint is dismissed.