The Appellant has formulated two issues for determination to argue this appeal as follows: a) Is the learned trial Judge’s conclusion that the Respondent also contributed to the extensions and renovations carried out by the Appellant supported by any evidence? b) Did the Respondent discharge the burden that shifted on him to prove that he paid for the completion of the renovations and extensions carried out by the Appellant on the matrimonial home? I have carefully considered the two issues for determination as formulated by the Appellant herein. Nevertheless, looking at the sole ground of appeal filed herein, it is my considered view that although I would wish to adopt the issues for determination as formulated by the Appellant, I will also wish to add one more issue which I think looking at the totality of the matters arising in this appeal, it will be pertinent to make a determination of this issue for reasons of public policy. I will therefore for these reasons adopt the issues for determination as formulated by the Appellant herein and add a third issue as follows: ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION: 1) Is the learned trial Judge’s conclusion that the Respondent also contributed to the extensions and renovations carried out by the Appellant supported by any evidence? 2) Did the Respondent discharge the burden that shifted on him to prove that he paid for the completion renovations and extensions carried out by the Appellant on the matrimonial home? 3) Is the Appellant entitled to a share of the property in issue and if so how, what is the extent of her share. CA – JUDGMENT MATTY FAYE V DAWDA JAWARA Page 8