Shaneka Kendra Cledanor nee Richardson v Jode Cledanor

• Jurisdiction: Bahamas
• Judge: Hanna-Adderley, J
• Judgment Date: 31 August 2022
• Court: Supreme Court (Bahamas)
• Docket Number: 2022/FAM/div/FP/00091

Between

Shaneka Kendra Cledanor nee Richardson

Petitioner

and

Jode Cledanor

Respondent

BS 2022 SC 147

Before:

The Honourable Justice Petra M. Hanna-Adderley

2022/FAM/div/FP/00091

IN THE SUPREME COURT

APPEARANCES:

Mr. Kendall Knowles for the Petitioner

Mrs. Cassietta Mclntosh-Pelecanos for the Respondent

RULING

Hanna-Adderley, J

Introduction

1 This is an application by the Respondent herein for leave to file an Answer and Cross-Petition out of time. The Registrar's Certificate was filed on June 28, 2022. The application for leave was commenced by Summons filed July 1, 2022 and supported by the Affidavits of the Respondent filed August 29 and September 2, 2022. The Petitioner is opposing this application and relies on the Petition filed erein on May 24, 2022 and the Affidavit filed herein on August 31, 2022.

2 The Respondent's evidence is that when he was served with the Petition he was appalled by its contents and filed a Memorandum of Appearance indicating his intention to defend the action. That he was unable to complete the requisite documents because he was attending to defending several other matters in Court pertaining to the Petitioner. He exhibited to his Affidavit a draft Answer and Cross- Petition. In his Memorandum of Appearance filed on June 1, 2022 he indicated that he was served with the Petition and accompanying documents on June 1, 2022 and that he intended to defend the action.

3 The Petitioner's evidence is that the Court ought not to grant the leave sought because the Respondent had no interest in the Petition for divorce until she had presented the Department of Immigration with a letter not to renew his Spousal Certificate. That the divorce is scheduled to be heard on October 29, 2022, and that the application for leave is a stalling tactic, in order to prevent the Petitioner from producing a Decree Nisi to the Immigration authorities. That the allegations she has made against the Respondent are true. That he has threatened her life and that she wants to get the divorce behind her. That the matter concerning the altercations between them are being heard in a criminal trial against the Respondent in the Magistrate's Court. She exhibited an undated letter to the Department of Immigration and a complaint dated July 4, 2022, addressed to S & C Magistrate Charlton Smith.

4 The Respondent denied that he is attempting to stall the proceedings. That he has resided in the Bahamas for over 20 years. That his work permit was renewed every year until he got married. That the Petitioner in March of 2022 began making false accusations against him and wrote to the Immigration Department stating that she was not supporting his spousal permit, despite the fact that they were still together and acting as husband and wife in all respects. That the Petitioner's assertion that he is contesting the Petition as result of the letter to the Department of Immigration is without merit because the Petition was not filed until some 2 months after she had sent the letter to the Department of Immigration. That as he was in The Bahamas legally prior to the Petitioner's attempt to stop his Spousal Permit. That he was granted a work permit which expires on March 6, 2023. That his stay in The Bahamas is not dependent on the Petitioner. That his children from the marriage reside in Grand Bahama, he owns property within The Bahamas and he operates an electrical business. That the Petitioner's attempt to have him deported failed and she was unaware that it did.

Submissions

5 Mrs. Cassietta Mclntosh-Pelecanos of Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Respondent always indicated his intention to defend the Petition. The Respondent accepted that he was late in filing his Answer and Cross-Petition. He was dealing with other matters in other courts concerning the parties and was not able to finalize the divorce documents within the requisite time but as soon as the Respondent's Counsel was alerted that the Registrar's Certificate had been issued this application for leave was immediately filed. That there are a number of issues in the Petition that the Respondent wants to address particularly as relate to his children. That when one looks at paragraphs 2–6 of the Petitioner's Affidavit in response, it appears that the Petitioner believes that this application is a stalling tactic for...