AWOJA in association with the Bureau of Women's Affairs recently conducted a public forum on legislation affecting women in Jamaica. Flair concludes the presentation of the facts and urges readers to clip the information, save it and discuss it with someone qualified to help you.
Call or visit AWOJA at: 4 Ellesmere Road in Kingston.
Recommended changes
For Clause 9, we recommend that there also be included therein, provision for the transfer of an interest in the family home from both spouses, to their children or from one spouse to the other and their children and that these transfers should also be exempt from Transfer Tax under the Transfer Tax Act. In addition, on a sale and transfer of the premises, pursuant to an Order made under the Act, such a transaction should also be exempt from Transfer Tax.
We recommend that banks, corporations, companies, public bodies or societies being stakeholders ought not to be permitted, as provided in Clause 11(1), to apply for orders regarding property to which the Bill applies.
We recommend that Clause 12(1) and (2) be re-drafted to make clear the intention of Parliament and/or the purpose and reason for the difference in the times at which the values of property ought to be determined.
Clause 13 relates to former spouses that can apply. A limitation period should be designated therein. We therefore suggest that these marriages, cohabitations or separation of these spouses, should have been terminated or ceased or commenced no longer than five years preceding the date of application. In relation to those persons application predating the coming into operation of the Act, then five years from the date of promulgation of the Act.
We note here our firm approval of the citing of factors which must be taken into account on a determination of the interests of the parties, and which include non-monetary contributions.
We recommend that Clause 15(1) should be extended by the adding of a sub-clause to include the power to make orders for the benefit of children, if so requested by one or both spouses.
With respect to Clause 17(3) we note that in the event of bankruptcy of a spouse, the Trustee in Bankruptcy is empowered to pay the debts secured on the family home and then to pay the other spouse the 50 per cent protected interest or "so much of it as remains after paying those debts". The spouse's protected one half interest must be protected in priority to debts other than debts falling under the provision of Clause 17(7).
The maximum fine of $1 million (Clause 20(2)), is patently excessive and we recommend a maximum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00). We suggest this because the intent here ought to be not punishment but the correction of the misdeed. Consequently we also recommend that imprisonment should be a last resort but rather that some form of community service be the sentence ordered against a Defendant with or without a fine.
In relation to Clause 23(1), we recommend the inclusion of a similar provision for the benefit of children as already recommended herein relation to Clause 15(1).
There is some confusion with respect to the provisions of Clause 23(5). As to the deceased's interest must pass to the estate under his/her Will or intestancy on death it is odd, to say the least, that a surviving spouse would be permitted to occupy the home or other property indefinitely. This would be unfair to the beneficiaries and contrary to the rules of equity and existing laws relating to inheritance.
