Police v Pierce [2010] CKHC 51; JP06.2010 (14 May 2010)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE COOK ISLANDS
HELD AT RAROTONGA
(CRIMINAL DIVISION)
JP No. 6/2010

IN THE MATTER of Section 76 of the Judicature Act 1980-81

BETWEEN

THE POLICE
Appellant

AND

DORA PIERCE
Respondent

Sen. Sgt. T. Howard for Police
Mr N. George for Defendant

JUDGMENT OF DAVID WILLIAMS CJ

[1] This is an Appeal by the Crown against the decision of a Justice of the Peace on 22 April 2010 in which a charge of contempt of Court was dismissed. The charge involved a breach of a final Non-Molestation Order made by Justice Hingston on 10 March 2008.

[2] This case is related to another case DP No. 03/2008 where I made final Non-Molestation Orders by consent against Alfred Wigmore, Wynne Paget Manuela and Tere Tamata.

[3] These Non-Molestation Orders relate to a long-running boundary dispute where Mrs Pierce and her family complain that the three persons named in the Non-Molestation Order in DP 3/2008 are trespassing by spreading Mrs Pierce's rubbish all over her property and doing other offensive things.

[4] Mrs Pierce admitted that she had breached the final Non-Molestation made by Justice Hingston. She said she did so because she was frustrated by the ongoing conduct on the other side and the failure of the Police to do anything about the matter.

[5] Her daughter and her nephew were in Court today and made remarks supporting her. Her nephew advised that in accordance with the JP's advice, they had sought the assistance of the mediator. Ms Marie Francis had been appointed and had examined the file. It was not yet known whether Mr Wigmore, Ms Manuela and Mr Tamata will agree to join the mediation.

[6] While I applaud the JP's suggestion of mediation, it is not appropriate for the Court to stand by in the face of flagrant breaches of final Non-Molestation Orders.

[7] If, as suggested by Mrs Pierce's nephew, the wording of the Non-Molestation Orders is inadequate, then steps should be taken to apply to the Court to amend.

[8] As Mrs Pierce says, it may be that if the Non-Molestation Orders and/or the mediation do not bring a solution, she and her family will have to apply for an injunction. She would be wise to take advice from her solicitor, Mr Arnold on all of tmatters.

[9] The Court has no power to force people to go to mediation. However, I wish to make it clear that it is the strong hope of the Court that Mr Wigmore, Ms Manued Mr a wila will agree to p to participate in the mediation. The mediation offers the best hope for an enduring solution to these pro.

[10] Returning to the Appeal, the Appeal is allowed and Mrs Pierce is convictnvicted of contempt of Court and ordered to pay a fine of $100.00. However, this Order is suspended for three months because I do not want to allow this sentence to inflame matters any further and adversely affect any possible chances for resolution for mediation. If Mrs Pierce does not transgress over the next three months, then the sentence of the fine will be cancelled automatically.

[11] I direct that this Judgment be served on all parties affected by the Non-Molestation Orders in 1/2008 and DP 03/2008.

David Williams CJ

14 May 2010

Editorial Note: Derived from the Court’s electronic records and believed to be correct and final.