Estate loses Cherry Gardens share after limitation defence succeeds

Faye DeMercado was declared the sole legal and beneficial owner of the Cherry Gardens property in a Supreme Court judgment delivered on 16 October 2026. Justice Andrea Martin-Swaby held that Tyrone DeMercado’s registered interest had been extinguished before he brought proceedings in September 2010.

The former spouses held that property and a second property in Harbour View as joint tenants. They separated in 1982. The dispute reached a retrial after an earlier decision was overturned on appeal; following Tyrone’s death, his son Kevin continued the proceedings as representative of the estate.

The judge accepted that Faye controlled the Cherry Gardens property and had locked Tyrone out, making entry dependent on her permission. But his continued mortgage payments mattered: the court counted time from the discharge of the original mortgage in 1992, rather than from the separation ten years earlier.

Applying sections 3, 14 and 30 of the Limitation of Actions Act to those findings, the court concluded that the estate could not recover the interest after eighteen years. Proposals to divide the property and limited visits for a family wedding and bereavement did not amount to effective re-entry. The decision turned on the evidence of possession, exclusion and the parties’ conduct, alongside the elapsed time.

The outcome differed for Harbour View. Faye did not seek to realise her interest there, and the court ordered that her registered share be transferred to the estate. The orders also required transfer of the estate’s registered Cherry Gardens share to Faye. Costs were awarded to Faye, to be taxed if not agreed.

Report of the delivered decision. The court’s treatment of the mortgage payments and visits depended on this case’s evidence. Later appeals or variations have not been checked.