Sterling, Paula-Ann v Sterling, Wayne

Case Number: 
HCV OOO69 OF 2007
Date of Delivery: 
03.12.2008

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA

CLAIM NO. HCV OOO69 OF 2007

BETWEEN PAULA-ANN TRACY STERLING CLAIMANT

AND WAYNE FABIAN STERLING DEFENDANT

Heard on October 28, and December 3, 2008

Property (Rights of Spouses) Act 2004: Declaration of interest in Property. Whether

house is family home for purposes of sections 6 and 7. Whether application has to be

made pursuant to section 7. whether section 7 (2) exhaustive; scope of section 14.

Circumstances informing a just and reasonable division of property; Whether decree

nisi is appropriate trigger for the purposes of section 13 application; Application of

Section 11 where cohabitation continues

Mr. G. Steer and Mr. C. Dowding instructed by Pickersgill, Dowding and Bayley-Williams

for Claimant.

Mrs. J. Brown Ramanand (instructed by Judith Brown Ramanand & Co. for the Defendants

ANDERSON J

This is an application by way of a Fixed Date Claim Form pursuant to the provisions of The

Property (Rights of Spouse) Act.(“the Act”) The claim is brought by Paula Ann Sterling

(“the Claimant”) against her husband, Wayne Sterling (hereinafter “the Respondent” or “the

Defendant”). In this matter, the Claimant seeks a declaration that she is entitled to the entire

100% beneficial interest in property located at Lot 88, 10 Lorraine Drive, Gregory Park in

the Parish of St. Catherine. For his part, the Respondent opposes the application by the

Claimant and asks the court to declare that each party is entitled to a fifty per cent (50%)

interest in the property. The Claimant has filed an affidavit which seeks to detail the factual

basis for her claim to the entire beneficial interest in the property.

For reasons which will become apparent later, I should point out that this claim was filed by

the Claimant under the now repealed Married Women’s Property Act, an Act which had by

then been repealed and replaced by the Property (Rights of Spouses) Act 2004. When the

matter came on for hearing, the parties agreed that it should proceed and the matter be treated

as a claim under the Act. It was so ordered.

Customer Service

customer complaints image