Sassy Garcia v Arima Door Centre Holding Company Ltd (Trinidad and Tobago)

Where a periodic tenancy has been validly terminated by notice to quit, the landlord’s right to recover possession accrues when the notice expires. Section 9 of the Real Property Limitation Act 1846 applies where an oral periodic tenancy continues without formal termination and rent remains unpaid; it does not postpone accrual after the tenancy has ended. The general limitation rules therefore apply to a tenant holding over wrongfully. Under sections 3 and 22, uninterrupted adverse possession for the statutory period bars the action and extinguishes the owner’s title.

The claimant sought possession of land occupied by the appellant. The occupation originated in a monthly tenancy granted to the appellant’s father in 1971. A notice to quit served on the appellant’s mother expired on 30 April 1996. Rent relating to earlier months was paid on 23 August 1996, but no rent was paid thereafter.

The trial judge and the Court of Appeal upheld the possession order, accepting that section 9 of the Real Property Limitation Act 1846 postponed accrual of the claimant’s right of action until the later rent payment. The central issue before the Board was whether time began to run on 30 April 1996 or 23 August 1996.

Appeal allowed. The Board proceeded on the claimant’s pleaded basis that the tenancy ended on 30 April 1996.

1. General accrual rule. The payment made on 23 August 1996 related to rent due before the tenancy ended. It did not acknowledge the true owner’s title or imply consent to continued occupation. Under the general law, the right to recover possession therefore accrued when the tenancy ended.
2. Deeming provisions. The deeming provisions in the Real Property Limitation Act 1846 are not exclusive. Where they do not apply, general principles determine when the right to recover land first accrues. Their purpose is to resolve uncertainty about when limitation begins, not to restrict the general limitation rule. The Board relied on Paradise Beach & Transportation Co Ltd v Price-Robinson [1968] AC 1072, 1085.
3. Section 9. Section 9 provides a clear rule where rent has not been paid under an oral periodic tenancy but no formal step has been taken to terminate it. In that situation, if rent was paid after the first period, time runs from the last receipt of rent. The provision prevents a landlord from relying on a continuing tenancy to delay commencement of limitation.
4. Termination by notice. Section 9 does not apply after a valid notice to quit has expired. The occupier is then no longer in possession as tenant, and the owner’s right to recover possession is no longer subject to the tenancy. Time consequently began to run on 30 April 1996.
5. Disposition. The 16-year limitation period had expired before the action was commenced in May 2012. The right to recover the property was therefore lost and the claimant’s title extinguished under section 22. The Board would set aside the possession order and make a declaration to that effect, subject to any written submissions on the proposed orders and costs within 14 days.

1. Court of Appeal of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: upheld the order for possession.
2. Privy Council: allowed the appeal and held that limitation began when the notice to quit expired.