Sunday | July 1, 2001

Home Page
Lead Stories
News
Business
Sport
Commentary
Letters
Entertainment
Arts &Leisure
Outlook

E-Financial Gleaner

Subscribe
Classifieds
Guest Book
Submit Letter
The Gleaner Co.
Advertising
Search

Go-Shopping
Question
Business Directory
Free Mail
Overseas Gleaner & Star
Kingston Live - Via Go-Jamaica's Web Cam atop the Gleaner Building, Down Town, Kingston
Discover Jamaica
Go-Chat
Go-Jamaica Screen Savers
Inns of Jamaica
Personals
Find a Jamaican
5-day Weather Forecast
Book A Vacation
Search the Web!

Supreme Court to decide Chin dispute

Barbara Gayle, Staff Reporter

THE dispute between Kingston businessman Lascelles Chin and his former wife Audrey Chin as to how the shares in Lasco Foods Ltd. should be divided is being decided by the Supreme Court.

In February this year the United Kingdom Privy Council sent back the case to the Supreme Court for a re-hearing so that certain witnesses could be cross-examined because there were critical issues to be decided.

Justice Clarke began hearing evidence under cross-examination in Chambers last month. The hearing will continue on July 26.

Mrs. Chin took the issue to the Supreme Court contending that she was entitled to half of the shares in the multi-million dollar company. Justice Seymour Panton (now a Court of Appeal Judge) heard the case in the Supreme Court in 1996 and upheld Mr. Chin's claim that Mrs. Chin was entitled to only one of the 250,000 shares in the company. Mrs. Chin, a chartered accountant and an executive at Sigma Investment Ltd., appealed the Supreme Court ruling and in May 1999 the Court of Appeal held that she was entitled to half the shares in the company.

Mr. Chin took the matter to the United Kingdom Privy Council which ruled that there should be a re-hearing.

What were the parties' joint intentions when the two original shares were allotted, one to Mrs. Chin, one to Mr. Chin? Was it intended that each would become a beneficial owner of the allotted share? What, if any, inference can be drawn from that allotment as to the intended ownership of the company? These are some of the questions which the Privy Council has asked the Court of Appeal to determine.

Cross-examination

Under cross-examination Mrs. Chin said Mr. Chin told her that she would be entitled to half of the business. Mr. Chin has started giving evidence under cross-examination and will continue when the hearing resumes. The parties will be calling witnesses to give evidence under cross-examination.

Mrs. Chin is being represented by attorneys Dr. Lloyd Barnett and Gordon Steer. Mr. Chin is represented by R. N. A. Henriques, Q. C., and attorney Leonard Green, instructed by the law firm Chen Green and Co.

Back to Business


















©Copyright 2000 Gleaner Company Ltd. | Disclaimer | Letters to the Editor | Suggestions