Fahie v Pickering et Al

• Jurisdiction: British Virgin Islands
• Court: High Court (British Virgin Islands)
• Judge: Glasgow, J.
• Judgment Date: 26 June 1972
• Neutral Citation: VG 1972 HC 5
• Docket Number: No. 18 of 1971
• Date: 26 June 1972

High Court

Glasgow, J.

No. 18 of 1971

Fahie

and

Pickering Et Al

Appearances:

J. S. Archibald for Plaintiff.

McW. Todman for Defendants.

Real Property - Land — Possession

Glasgow, J.

1 The Plaintiff's claim against the Defendants is as administratrix of the estate of Thomas Frederick Frett, deceased, for possession of a piece or parcel of land situate at Josiah's Bay in the island of Tortola in the British Virgin Islands (hereinafter called the property in dispute) containing 3.7 acres and bounded on the East by a road, on the West by lands of John Frett on the North by the sea, and on the South by lands of D. Hodge.

2 The Plaintiff alleged in her Statement of Claim that by a conveyance dated 11th August, 1917 recorded as Deed No. 31 of 1917 in the Register of Deeds in the British Virgin Islands, the said deceased became seised in fee sample in possession of five acres more or less of land (hereinafter called the said land) of which the property in dispute forms a part, that on the 25th January, 1939 the said deceased died so seised, intestate, and that on the date of the death of the deceased the Plaintiff, then Rebecca Frett, the lawful widow and relict of the deceased, took possession of the said land with the consent, and on behalf of, Thomas Frett, then a minor and the lawful heir-at-law of the deceased, and continued in such possession openly, peacefully and without interruption until March, 1959. The Plaintiff allege that on and after March, 1959 the Defendants wrongfully took, and still wrongfully retain, possession of the property in dispute. In their Defence the Defendants denied that either the Plaintiff or the persons through whom the Plaintiff claims is or were at any material time in possession of, or the owner of, or entitled to possession of, the property in dispute. They deny that the property in dispute forms a part of the land conveyed by Deed No, 31 of 1917, or that the Plaintiff took possession thereof as alleged. The Defendants also denied that they took possession of the property in dispute as alleged: they say that they are lawfully in possession of the property in dispute and that they and their predecessors in title have been in such posse: $ion continuously from a date prior to the 11th August, 1917. The Defendant pleaded further, or in the alternative, that the Plaintiff's claim herein is barred and the Plaintiff's title (if any, which they denied) was, prior to the...