Lenohamy vs Samuel – clr volume 2 page 101

In the case between Lenohamy and Samuel, the court addressed the issue of whether a claim for title to land grounded on an alleged ouster can prevail absent concrete evidence of that ouster. It was held that the plaintiffs’ claim failed due to the absence of proof of ouster or disturbance of possession, reaffirming the principle that a party alleging ouster must provide clear evidence of dispossession before title can be adjudicated. The decision drew upon established legal standards regarding possession and the necessity for substantiating a cause of action, emphasizing that mere assertion of lineage or title without evidence of interference cannot support such claims.

Withers J. — The claim was found to be fundamentally flawed, as neither the plaintiffs nor their counsel addressed the