Tweet
Latibeaudiere in 'bitter' property fight with ex-wife
BY PAUL HENRY Observer staff reporter henryp@jamaicaobserver.com
Monday, June 07, 2010
var addthis_pub="jamaicaobserver";
DERICK Latibeaudiere, the once powerful and respected central bank governor, is currently locked in what a judge described as a "bitter" legal conflict with his wife, Paulette, of 30 years over property they accumulated during their now failed marriage.
The "bitter" fight — as characterised by Justice Donald McIntosh in his recent Supreme Court judgement that gave the former Mrs Latibeaudiere half of the ex-Bank of Jamaica (BOJ) head's racehorses, expensive watch, coin and painting collections and a property in the posh Cherry Hill, St Andrew community -- has now found its way into the Court of Appeal.
McIntosh also ruled that the ex-banker had no share in a property in Norbrook Woods, which the judge found to be a gift to Mrs Latibeaudiere, the title of which bore her name and those of her children.
"No doubt it was intended as a safe haven for her if one became necessary," McIntosh wrote in his six-page opinion.
But Mr Latibeaudiere disagreed with the ruling, handed down on April 9, and on May 19 filed a notice of appeal.
"The learned trial judge erred in fact and in law in finding that the purpose of the [Property (Rights of the Spouses)] Act follows from the principle of equal shares or the basic tenet of the Act is to ensure equality between the parties upon their separation," Mr Latibeaudiere said in his notice of appeal.
"The learned trial judge gave no reasons as to how and why this finding had been made and under which principle of law," he added.
The two met while students at the University of the West Indies. They became friends "and perhaps starry-eyed lovers", as they sought their academic qualifications and by 1976 were "happily married", according to information in McIntosh's ruling.
The "union started off well" and the "enterprising" couple worked together, pooling their resources. The family later increased by two children and prospered materially. Great upward mobility followed. But somewhere along the line, the union started to unravel, the court document said.
"It is apparent that from the material successes, the fame and the fortune, there emanated dangerous pitfalls. There were rifts causing periodic separations which culminated in their irrevocable separation in 2007," wrote McIntosh.
Shortly after the 2007 separation, Mr Latibeaudiere filed a fixed date claim form seeking declarations and remedies that he and the defendant own equal shares in a properties on Belvedere Crescent, Forrest Hill; Cherry Hill, St Andrew; Hopefield Avenue, Kingston 10; two shops along Half-Way Tree Road; four shops in The Domes plaza along Hagley Park Road; townhouse and a one-bedroom apartment in Point, Negril; a one-bedroom apartment at Seacastle, St James; a one-bedroom apartment in Columbus Heights, Ocho Rios and a property in Norbrook Woods, Kingston 8.
But in her defence and counterclaim, Mrs Latibeaudiere also claimed equal shares in the properties except for the Norbrook Woods property to which she claimed sole ownership.
In addition, she claimed other properties not mentioned by the ex-banker, including the watch, coin and painting collections and the Cherry Hill property of which she was awarded 50 per cent ownership.
The two had, prior to the ruling, tried their hands at counselling and arbitration but to no avail, the court document said.
Mr Latibeaudiere is asking the Appellate Court to overturn McIntosh's ruling and uphold his claim made in the Supreme Court.
He is also seeking other relief, including that the respondent has no shares in his investments at the BOJ and the Bank of Nova Scotia or any other financial institutions; that the parties have equal shares in the business trading as CEMPS; and that the respondent, having taken furniture when she moved from the matrimonial home in 1998 and then again in 2007, is not entitled to any further order as to furniture, appliances and fittings acquired during the marriage.
BY PAUL HENRY Observer staff reporter henryp@jamaicaobserver.com
Monday, June 07, 2010
var addthis_pub="jamaicaobserver";
DERICK Latibeaudiere, the once powerful and respected central bank governor, is currently locked in what a judge described as a "bitter" legal conflict with his wife, Paulette, of 30 years over property they accumulated during their now failed marriage.
The "bitter" fight — as characterised by Justice Donald McIntosh in his recent Supreme Court judgement that gave the former Mrs Latibeaudiere half of the ex-Bank of Jamaica (BOJ) head's racehorses, expensive watch, coin and painting collections and a property in the posh Cherry Hill, St Andrew community -- has now found its way into the Court of Appeal.
McIntosh also ruled that the ex-banker had no share in a property in Norbrook Woods, which the judge found to be a gift to Mrs Latibeaudiere, the title of which bore her name and those of her children.
"No doubt it was intended as a safe haven for her if one became necessary," McIntosh wrote in his six-page opinion.
But Mr Latibeaudiere disagreed with the ruling, handed down on April 9, and on May 19 filed a notice of appeal.
"The learned trial judge erred in fact and in law in finding that the purpose of the [Property (Rights of the Spouses)] Act follows from the principle of equal shares or the basic tenet of the Act is to ensure equality between the parties upon their separation," Mr Latibeaudiere said in his notice of appeal.
"The learned trial judge gave no reasons as to how and why this finding had been made and under which principle of law," he added.
The two met while students at the University of the West Indies. They became friends "and perhaps starry-eyed lovers", as they sought their academic qualifications and by 1976 were "happily married", according to information in McIntosh's ruling.
The "union started off well" and the "enterprising" couple worked together, pooling their resources. The family later increased by two children and prospered materially. Great upward mobility followed. But somewhere along the line, the union started to unravel, the court document said.
"It is apparent that from the material successes, the fame and the fortune, there emanated dangerous pitfalls. There were rifts causing periodic separations which culminated in their irrevocable separation in 2007," wrote McIntosh.
Shortly after the 2007 separation, Mr Latibeaudiere filed a fixed date claim form seeking declarations and remedies that he and the defendant own equal shares in a properties on Belvedere Crescent, Forrest Hill; Cherry Hill, St Andrew; Hopefield Avenue, Kingston 10; two shops along Half-Way Tree Road; four shops in The Domes plaza along Hagley Park Road; townhouse and a one-bedroom apartment in Point, Negril; a one-bedroom apartment at Seacastle, St James; a one-bedroom apartment in Columbus Heights, Ocho Rios and a property in Norbrook Woods, Kingston 8.
But in her defence and counterclaim, Mrs Latibeaudiere also claimed equal shares in the properties except for the Norbrook Woods property to which she claimed sole ownership.
In addition, she claimed other properties not mentioned by the ex-banker, including the watch, coin and painting collections and the Cherry Hill property of which she was awarded 50 per cent ownership.
The two had, prior to the ruling, tried their hands at counselling and arbitration but to no avail, the court document said.
Mr Latibeaudiere is asking the Appellate Court to overturn McIntosh's ruling and uphold his claim made in the Supreme Court.
He is also seeking other relief, including that the respondent has no shares in his investments at the BOJ and the Bank of Nova Scotia or any other financial institutions; that the parties have equal shares in the business trading as CEMPS; and that the respondent, having taken furniture when she moved from the matrimonial home in 1998 and then again in 2007, is not entitled to any further order as to furniture, appliances and fittings acquired during the marriage.
Comment