Christen Chambers wins groundbreaking judgment in the most fiercely contested divorce case in Seychelles history

The landmark judgment delivered on the 01 September 2020 came after two long years of litigation between Annick Albert (the Petitioner) and Christen Chambers’ client, Joseph Albert (the Defendant).  The Petitioner asked the court for fifty (50%) percent of her ex-husband’s assets on the basis that she did not contribute financially to her ex-husband’s wealth but instead raised their three children and tended to their education allowing Mr Albert the freedom to successfully build his businesses.

Under Seychelles Law this may have opened the door to the Petitioner obtaining a share in the estate. However, the defence team made up of two Seychellois Attorneys, Tamara Christen and Anthony Derjacques, put forward the best defence available. In line with French custom the ex-wife’s parents organised the wedding in Mauritius. Crucially both ex-husband and ex-wife expressly opted out of the default position in Mauritius, that being the regime of ‘community of property’, and instead chose the regime of ‘separation of property’ to govern their property rights throughout their marriage. In simple words that meant “what is yours is yours and what is mine is mine” and the Defendants’ attorneys’ asked the court to apply the Law.

In this high-value judgment, the Honourable Chief Justice found in favour of the ex-husband finding that the application of Mauritian Law had been pleaded and proved and went on to find that the regime of ‘separation of property’ under Mauritius Law was chosen by both parties and applied the principles applicable to that regime. In a one hour-long judgment, the Honourable Chief Justice found that assets individually purchased by one party remained for that party and “that there is no matrimonial property per se”. Following with “the court is not empowered by Mauritian Law to adjust the ownership of properties”. Therefore, there was nothing to be divided.

The ex-wife’s claim was completely defeated and her application for division of matrimonial property was successfully dismissed.

Citation – Albert v Albert [2020] SCSC 618