7,424 judgments 29,712 public-register documents 143,540 judgment pages 132,515 public-register pages 276,055 total pages
Judgment

Estate of Lawrence Edwin Farrington (Deceased) v Azenetta Banks - Judgment

Civ App 0014/1969 · 1982-11-25

Trespass - appeal from Grand Court; Sufficient evidence to support trial judge’s order; Title by long possession considered but unnecessary

Full metadata
Cause Number Civ App 0014/1969
Court CICA (Civ)
Judge Carey JA, Ross JA, Zacca JA
Parties Estate of Lawrence Edwin Farrington (Deceased) v Azenetta Banks - Judgment
Judgment Date 1982-11-25
Subject Trespass - appeal from Grand Court; Sufficient evidence to support trial judge’s order; Title by long possession considered but unnecessary
Filename (current) 82-11-25-Lawrence-Farrington-v-Azenetta-Ebanks.pdf
Full text9 paragraphs Download PDF

Use paragraph links to cite this judgment, or download the original PDF. Select text to copy a passage.

In the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands — Civil Division
Cause No. Civ App 0014/1969
Between
Estate of Lawrence Edwin Farrington (Deceased)
- v -
Azenetta Banks - Judgment
Before
Carey JA, Ross JA, Zacca JA
Judgment delivered 1982-11-25

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE CAYMAN ISLANDS

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 14 OF 1969

BETWEEN: THE ESTATE OF LAWRENCE EDWIN FARRINGTON (DECEASED) PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

&
AZENETTA BANKS DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

BEFORE: THE HON. MR. JUSTICE ZACCA - PRESIDENT, COURT OF APPEAL
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE CAREY, J.A.
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE ROSS, J.A.

November 25, 1982

Hon. President:

This is an appeal from the learned trial judge of the Grand Court. The pleadings, and indeed the case as presented to the learned trial judge was, in our view, essentially a case of trespass. We find that there was sufficient evidence on which the learned trial judge could have made the order that he did. We see no reason for interfering with his order. In fact, Mr. Edwards concedes as much. However, in his reasons for judgement, the learned trial judge considered and decided that the plaintiff had acquired title by long possession.

In our view, it was unnecessary for the learned trial judge to consider the question of title. This court has not heard arguments on the question of title as we considered it unnecessary to do so in order to determine the issue which was before the trial judge. In the event, the appeal is dismissed, the order of the trial judge affirmed and costs of appeal to be the respondent's.

Find similar