Hutchinson, Leonia Agatha v Hutchinson, Johnette George

The case revolves around a property and maintenance dispute between two former spouses, the Claimant and the Defendant, following their separation and divorce. The main issues in the case were the division of two properties (the Willowdene property and the Green Acres property) and whether the Defendant should be required to pay maintenance to the Claimant.

Key Points of the Case:

  1. Willowdene Property (Family Home):
    • Both parties agreed that the Willowdene property, which was their family home, was purchased jointly and should be divided equally between them.
    • The judge upheld this agreement and ruled that both parties were entitled to a 50% share of the Willowdene property.
  2. Green Acres Property:
    • The Green Acres property was purchased solely in the Defendant’s name after the parties had separated, although during the course of the marriage.
    • The Claimant argued that she was entitled to a share of this property because the funds used to purchase it came from joint accounts and savings that were accumulated during the marriage.
    • The Defendant claimed he bought the property using his personal savings and loans and that the Claimant had no right to it since they were separated at the time of purchase.

    Judge’s Decision:

    • The judge found the Claimant’s testimony more credible, particularly regarding the use of funds from their joint NCB Capital Market account, which the Defendant used to secure a loan for the Green Acres property.
    • The judge ruled that the Claimant was entitled to a small share of the Green Acres property, specifically half of the funds from the joint account used to purchase it.
  3. Maintenance Claim:
    • The Claimant sought maintenance from the Defendant, claiming financial hardship after their separation.
    • The Defendant opposed this, arguing that the Claimant was capable of supporting herself and that he did not have the financial capacity to pay maintenance due to his current obligations, including supporting his new wife.

    Judge’s Decision:

    • The judge found that the Claimant had exaggerated her financial difficulties and was capable of maintaining herself, especially since she had a pension and other financial resources.
    • The judge also considered the Defendant’s current financial obligations, including his responsibilities to his new wife, and concluded that he did not have the capacity to provide maintenance to the Claimant.
    • Consequently, the Claimant’s request for maintenance was denied.

Summary of the Judge’s Decision:

  • The Willowdene property is to be divided equally between the Claimant and the Defendant.
  • The Claimant is entitled to a small share of the Green Acres property, specifically half of the funds used from the joint account to purchase it.
  • The Claimant’s request for maintenance was refused, as the judge determined she could support herself and that the Defendant did not have the financial means to pay maintenance.

The judge’s decisions were based on the credibility of the testimonies, the contributions of both parties to the marriage and their financial situations, and the legal principles under the Property (Rights of Spouses) Act and the Maintenance Act

Source: Supreme Court of Jamaica
Read this court case about custody and child maintenance in Jamaica W.I.