Juliet Holness, a director and the principal shareholder of a real estate development business suing a landowner in St. Andrew, has denied accusations that she is a bully who vandalized private property to get their multi-million-dollar investment.
As the Supreme Court trial involving the building of an apartment complex by JAJ Development and Holdings Ltd began on Tuesday, Holness, a member of parliament and the wife of Prime Minister Andrew Holness was also questioned about her honesty.
- Advertisement -
JAJ is suing Charlene Ashley, the proprietor of Lot 21A in Leas Flat, Red Hills, for the ownership of the land; the company paid $22 million for a portion of it in 2012. Ashley will receive one of the apartments as payment. Lot 21B, often known as lot two, is JAJ’s share.
Ashley counter-sued, accusing JAJ of trespassing.
The five-day trial before Justice David Batts was scheduled to begin on Monday, but the court granted Ashley’s plea to continue last-minute negotiations to reach a settlement.
These negotiations fell through, and on Tuesday morning Holness testified in the courtroom on King Street.
Ashley’s witness testimony was broken down for her by Sidia Smith, one of her attorneys from the Bennett Beecher-Bravo law company.
Ashley has charged Holness with employing “bully tactics” in an effort to seize some of Lot 21A. She said she was “shocked” when she came home one day to discover landscaping work and other objects bordering the development allegedly damaged by JAJ at the rear of her property.
When her attorney asked Holness to comment on the assertion, she answered, “Absolutely not.”
The MP said, “At no time at all,” when the attorney asked if he ever used bullying techniques against Ashley.
In addition, when asked if she was aware of any JAJ staff members attempting to intimidate Ashley, Holness responded, “Absolutely not.”
Ashley claimed to have witnessed Holness ordering workmen to destroy “an entire concrete terrace” in a June 2018 incident.
“’I appealed to Holness to desist from destroying my property (chain link fence, stepping stones, pathways, and all the sentimental items – bricks from my first home, plants, a large fish tank, etc) which I had there on the concrete terrace. Holness hissed her teeth and ignored my pleas…’,” Ashley’s statement was read aloud by Smith.
Ashley said, “Holness’ foreman grabbed the phone from me, deleting the video, refusing to return the phone,” as she attempted to use it to record the incident on video.
Ashley said her husband was compelled to contact the police “in order to stop the assault from escalating” and accused JAJ of “trespassing” for doing so.
Ashley went on to say, “I indicated to Holness that I could not believe that she had an entire site full of men bullying me and destroying my property,” before asserting that the foreman threatened her.
Holness claimed to remember the incident, but she denied being responsible for the terrace’s destruction since “there was no terrace on the reserved opening.”
She added that once the apartment complex was completed, the sole access point was a reserve road that, according to her, passed across a portion of Ashley’s land. On the road, she claimed, was a dog home constructed from PVC pipes, bricks, and stones with a thin layer of cement on top.
“Several efforts (over 3-4 years) were made to have, as Mr. Ashley agreed, the doghouse removed. But it wasn’t done. And on that day, we finally decided to remove the doghouse because it was not a concrete structure as indicated in the agreement for sale,” according to Holness in reference to Charlene’s husband Earl, and to the sale agreement’s clause prohibiting the demolition of concrete structures on the reserve road.
Anthony “Martin” Harris, the foreman in question, was accused of seizing a phone in an altercation, that was refuted by Holness.
“I did not see him take her phone. In fact, he was on his iPad videotaping the doghouse,” she alleged, adding that “Harris at no time threatened Ashley. She actually had her finger pointing in his face”.
Holness, however, responded “absolutely not” to Ashley’s claim that the two had spoken with a possible investor named “Mr. Hickey” to finance the project after Holness allegedly said she lacked the funds to finish the complex.
When construction on the project slowed down in 2018, according to Ashley, she allegedly connected Holness to Hickey after the businesswoman allegedly claimed that money had been transferred to support Andrew Holness’ political campaign.
Additionally, Holness has acknowledged that Ashley’s lot was included in the 2013 edition of the apartment complex’s plans. She said that the extra space from Lot 21A was taken into account when determining the density, which allowed the Kingston and St. Andrew Municipal Corporation to authorize the creation of more livable rooms.
Holness said when asked if it was “intentional”: “No, it was an error [and] immediately on realizing that that error was made we proceeded to make the correction. That was done by writing the authorities and resubmitting the drawings with the removal of the area that was overestimated. Therefore, reducing the actual density.”
She said that in June 2021, the revised design was accepted.
Despite the fact that “nothing that relates to the development” was dependent on the Ashleys’ land, the Ashleys’ house is still visible on the site plan. Holness said that until there are distinct titles, the parish officials demand that the primary site plan must represent both lots.
JAJ’s main defense is around the title since Holness has maintained that the Ashleys’ submission of a subdivided title does not adhere to the terms of the selling agreement.
Holness maintains that the reserved route on the title delivered in December is only three meters wide, which is five meters less than what was purportedly negotiated.
She refuted claims that the access road was only “superimposed” onto the plan for “academic” purposes and was never meant for practical usage.
Less than 30 minutes before the day’s hearings came to an end, Ashley’s main attorney, Aon Stewart, began his cross-examination of Holness.
Holness, who serves as the deputy speaker of the Jamaican House of Representatives, was questioned by Stewart early on about her honesty.
“Absolutely”, she replied. When questioned if Holness was a person of integrity, she said, “Yes, sir.”
Holness responded when questioned about the access road that the easement was situated “immediately beside” Ashley’s property.
Stewart is anticipated to resume today.
The development’s progress has been stagnant since about February 2020.
