Lamont (Kathleen May) v Lamont (Alvis); Lamont (Alvis) v Lamont (Kathleen May) [Consolidated Suits]
| Jurisdiction | Jamaica |
| Judge | MANGATAL J. |
| Judgment Date | 20 December 2005 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [2005] 12 JJC 2008 |
| Court | Supreme Court (Jamaica) |
| Date | 20 December 2005 |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA
MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY - Division of property
Alvis Lamont "the husband" and Kathleen May Lamont "the wife" were married in 1963. In 2002 the husband filed an application under the Married Women's Property Act for division of property. At that time divorce proceedings were pending. The parties are now divorced. The wife filed proceedings in 2003 and both sets of proceedings are now consolidated.
The evidence was concluded on 14 th September 2005 and I ordered the parties to submit written submissions in the latter part of September, which they have done.
This case is primarily concerned with the husband's claim in the 2002 Suit that he is solely entitled to property known as all that parcel of land part of No. 77 Molynes Road, in the Parish of Saint Andrew, being the Lot numbered 17 on the Plan of No. 77 Molynes Road and being the land contained in Certificate of Title registered at Volume 943 Folio 233 of the Register Book of Titles "the Molynes Road property". The parties are registered as joint tenants on the title to the Molynes Road property. The wife contests the claim and says that she is entitled to a 50 percent interest in this property.
In the 2003 Suit the wife had claimed an interest in a parcel of land at East Albion in Saint Thomas. However, in his written submissions on behalf of the wife, Counsel Mr. Pierre Rogers has conceded, rightly in my view, that the evidence falls short of what is required to prove the wife's claim in that regard. That claim will as a consequence be dismissed. This judgment concerns itself therefore with the contending claims to the Molynes Road property.
Both parties filed Affidavits and were cross-examined extensively. This cross-examination proved useful as credibility is a major issue in this case.
The Husband's case
The husband states that the Molynes Road property was acquired in about 1984 for a purchase price of one hundred and eight thousand Jamaican dollars. At no time did the wife contribute to the acquisition of this property, directly or indirectly, financially or otherwise. The entire deposit and all mortgage payments made through the Morant Bay branch of the Jamaica National Building Society "J.N.B.S." were paid by him alone until the mortgage was eventually discharged. At the time of the purchase of the Molynes Road property the wife had seasonal employment as a nurse's aid in the United States and the husband was a full-time plumber.
There was never any agreement that they would share the family's expenses, there was no understanding that he would be responsible for paying the mortgage and the wife would be responsible for the other expenses. He not only paid the mortgage, but also took care of all the household expenses and all the children's educational expenses.
The parties also owned a property at 1332 Scenectady Avenue, Brooklyn, New York "the New York property". This property was registered in the names of the husband and the wife as well as the husband's brother Newton Lamont.
The husband states that in 1993 he and the wife eventually separated but they continued to live in the same house in New York until 1995. In 1993 the husband and wife had a discussion in which the wife indicated that she would like to move to Miami and that the husband should buy her a house in Miami. The husband told her that since they have two properties, one in Jamaica and one in New York the wife should choose one. He then asked the wife whether she wanted the Molynes Road property or the New York property and the wife indicated that she did not want to come back to Jamaica. The husband told the wife to take the New York property, sell it and use the proceeds to purchase the house in Miami. The husband agreed to remove his name from the property documents so that the wife could sell the New York property without his input.
Eventually the husband's name was removed from the title documents for the New York property and in so doing no money was paid to him by the wife for his share and interest in the New York property.
The transfer of the New York property to the wife's sole name was done on the understanding between them that the wife would have no claim, interest or share in the Molynes Road property.
The Wife's case
The wife agrees that the Molynes Road property was acquired in or about 1984 for a purchase price of one hundred and eight thousand Jamaican dollars. However, the deposit was paid by both the husband and herself and she also gave the husband one hundred and fifty United States dollars monthly towards the monthly mortgage payments until the mortgage was paid in full.
The wife states that she was working at the time of the purchase. After she gave birth to the party's last child in or about 1978 she had full-time employment as a nursing assistant. At times she had two jobs, one "on the books", one "off the books". She at no time had seasonal employment as a nursing aid.
The arrangement or partnership between the wife and the husband whilst they lived together as man and wife was that she would run the house and the husband would pay the mortgage in respect of the New York property...
To continue reading
Request your trial