Flynagen Ltd v Corozal Free Zone Development Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Judge: Shanks, J.
• Judgment Date: 18 April 2000
• Court: High Court (Belize)
• Docket Number: 223 of 1997
• Date: 18 April 2000

High Court

Shanks, J.

223 of 1997

Flynagen Limited

and

Corozal Free Zone Development Limited

Appearances:

Mr. Denys Barrow, S.C. for the applicant.

Mr. Dons Waithe, for the respondent.

Compensation - Assessment of compensation — Caution placed on land ‘wrongfully and without reasonable costs’ — Section 134 of Registered Land Act, Cap. 157 — Valuation of land — Land sold for $32,000 — Finding that the value of land was therefore $32,000 which represented the best price available for the land — Compensation of $101,400 awarded.

Shanks, J.

1 I heard on the 6th of April, 2000 a number of applications arising out of the judgment I delivered in this matter on 24th January, 2000. Since that judgment Mr. Dons Waithe has replaced Mr. Michael Young, S.C., as the respondent's attorney and on 7th April, 2000 I made an order fixing this hearing and requiring the Parties to file affidavit evidence in support of their contentions by 31st March, 2000 and evidence in reply by 4th March, 2000 and to notify each other by 4th April, 2000 if they required any deponent to attend for cross-examination. Neither side gave any such notice and I have dealt with the applications on the affidavit evidence before me.

2 The first matter is an assessment of the current value of Lot 325 which the applicant ought to have been in a position to restore to the respondent (CFZDL) when the contract was declared by me to be at an end. Mr. Arnold in an affidavit dated 30th March, 2000, contends for a figure of $88,000 (or $40 per acre) based on the price paid by purchasers of Lots 369 and 370 in January which was $47 per square foot. Mr. Burks, the plaintiffs agent, swore an affidavit on 4th April, 2000 stating that Lot 325 was actually sold in August, 1999 for $32,000 and produced a receipt and the auctioneer, Mr. Castillo, swears that Lots 399, 412, 413, 414 and 415 were put up for auction on 3rd April, 2000 and the highest offer received was $20,000. It seems to me that the best evidence of the value of lot 325 is the price it actually obtained and I can see no reason why the plaintiff would not have tried to get the best price available. Lots 369 and 370 may for all I know, have different features to those of 325. I therefore assess its value at $32,000.

3 I next deal with the plaintiff's application for damages under section 134 of the Land Registration Act arising out of the placing of a caution over parcel 353 by CFZDL on 9th September, 1996. Mr. Waithe's first point in relation to this was that CFZDL was not liable under the section because, although in the end it has been found that they had no rights over the land, they placed and maintained the caution because there was a genuine dispute. Section 134...