CCJ restores High Court ruling in Guyana land dispute, overturns costs award
Key Points(5)
- The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has ruled in favor of Janet Hassan in a long-running Guyana land dispute, finding that a receipt issued in 1990 constituted evidence of an agreement to sell the property.
- In a judgment delivered November 3, the Trinidad-based court, which is Guyana's final court of appeal, allowed Hassan's appeal in the case of Janet Hassan v.
- Romanie Gouveia and restored a High Court order dismissing Gouveia's claim for possession.
- The dispute centered on a receipt signed in 1990 by Eric Sue, recording a payment of GYD$2,235 by Hassan's husband, Abdool Hassan, "for the use of" the land.
- The document marked the payment as "Full Payment" and contemplated the construction of houses on the property.
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has ruled in favor of Janet Hassan in a long-running Guyana land dispute, finding that a receipt issued in 1990 constituted evidence of an agreement to sell the property.
In a judgment delivered November 3, the Trinidad-based court, which is Guyana's final court of appeal, allowed Hassan's appeal in the case of Janet Hassan v. Romanie Gouveia and restored a High Court order dismissing Gouveia's claim for possession.
The dispute centered on a receipt signed in 1990 by Eric Sue, recording a payment of GYD$2,235 by Hassan's husband, Abdool Hassan, "for the use of" the land. The document marked the payment as "Full Payment" and contemplated the construction of houses on the property.
It also stated that the land was reserved for the straightening of the Essequibo Road and that "no transport can be issued." In Guyana, a transport is a legal document recording ownership of land or immovable property, similar to a title deed.
Gouveia, the executrix of Sue's estate and the transported owner of the land, later brought a claim for possession in the High Court.
The trial judge dismissed the claim, finding that the receipt was authentic and provided evidence of a binding agreement for the sale of the property from Sue to Abdool Hassan.
However, the Court of Appeal overturned that decision, interpreting the receipt as a licence or permission to occupy the land rather than an agreement of sale. It ordered Hassan to surrender possession by December 1, 2025, and pay GYD$175,000 in costs.
Hassan appealed to the CCJ, which found that the Court of Appeal had placed too much emphasis on particular wording in the receipt without adequately considering the broader circumstances in which it was created.
The regional court held that the receipt, read objectively and as a whole, demonstrated an agreement to sell the land.
In particular, the CCJ noted that the land's reservation for the straightening of the Essequibo Road, together with the undisputed fact that Sue was not the transported owner, helped explain why the receipt stated that no transport could be issued.
The court therefore allowed Hassan's appeal and restored the High Court's order dismissing Gouveia's claim for possession.
The CCJ also overturned a separate GYD$300,000 costs award imposed on Hassan by the Court of Appeal in an application in which she had been granted permission to appeal to the regional court but denied a stay of the order requiring her to surrender the land.
The CCJ observed that the Court of Appeal had provided no reasons for awarding costs that exceeded those of the main appeal, despite the application being routine and partly successful.
It described the award as excessive and disproportionate, warning that arbitrary or significantly disproportionate costs orders could undermine access to justice and procedural fairness.
Gouveia was ordered to repay the GYD$300,000 to Hassan by December 3, 2026, and to pay Hassan's standard costs before the CCJ, as well as her costs in the High Court and Court of Appeal.
