Joseph v Hunt

• Jurisdiction: Saint Kitts and Nevis
• Court: High Court (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
• Judge: Glasgow, J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1969
• Neutral Citation: KN 1969 HC 8
• Docket Number: No. 2 of 1969
• Date: 01 January 1969

High Court

Glasgow, J.

No. 2 of 1969

Joseph

and

Hunt

Appearances:

C.F. Henville, Q.C. for plaintiff

Dr. W.V. Herbert for defendant

Damages - Trespass to land

Facts: The plaintiff and the defendant were tenants of adjoining pieces of land on a single estate. The plaintiff constructed a fence, which prevented the defendant from opening her window. The defendant's window on opening intruded on the plaintiff's property. Whether the defendant had trespassed on the plaintiff's property.

Held: That the injury to the plaintiff's legal rights was small and the plaintiff would be awarded nominal damages in the sum of $10.00.

Glasgow, J.

1 The plaintiff's claim is worded as follows: The plaintiff's claim is for $500 damages for –

• (a) wrongfully pulling dawn the plaintiff's fence by the defendant his servants or agents on or about the 11 ^th day of November 1968;

• (b) at all material times wrongfully permitting his the defendant's window to open upon and to project over the plaintiff's land”.

2 The facts as I find them are as follows: The plaintiff is and has been for many years the tenant of the owners of Pond and Needsmust Estates in respect of an irregularly shaped lot of land shown as Lot 8 on a plan of survey dated 12 ^th October 1965. The defendant is and has been for many years the tenant of the said owners in respect of a lot of land roughly rectangular in shapes shown as Lot 9 on the said plan of survey dated the 12 ^th October 1965.

3 There is a passage 8 feet wide and about 70 feet long leading to the larger portion of the plaintiff's said lot from East Park Range. This passage is itself, a part of Lot 8 and in fact it leads to no other lot. The plaintiff erected a barrier made of wood and metal with a gate in the centre between the said passage and East Park Range.

4 The plaintiff's lot is bounded on the North by a concrete block wall belonging to the central Housing Authority. That part of the plaintiff's lot which consists of the passage is bounded on the South by Lot 9, the property of the defendant. When the plaintiff went to live at Lot 8 the defendant was already living at Lot 9 and there was a fence separating the defendant's lot from that of the plaintiff. In 1960 the defendant removed a part of the fence, which separated his lot from the plaintiff's on the North beginning from the entrance to the said passage. The defendant then erected a shop building on Lot 9. The said building is made of concrete blocks and its northern wall runs alongside of the northern boundary of Lot 9 and about 3 or 4 inches inside it. There is a window on the northern side of the shop building. The window is made in two vertical halves, each have being about...