In re Veikirangi [2002] CKLC 2; Application 328.02 (16 August 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE COOK ISLANDS
HELD AT RAROTONGA
(LAND DIVISION)

APPLICATION NO. 328/02

IN THE MATTER of Section 450 of
the Cook Islands Act 1915

AND

IN THE MATTER of the land known as
IKURANGI SEC 127C, AREVAI SEC 129A
NO. 1 NGATIPA SEC 127, AVARUA

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by
TE KURA VEIKIRANGI to revoke the Succession
Order made on the 11.11.49 to the interest
of NGAPOKO PARAU TARAARE
in the land Ikurangi Sec 127C, Avarua.

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by
TE KURA VEIKERANGI to revoke the
Succession Order made on the 17.6.75 to the interest
of NGAPOKO PARAU TARAARE
In the land Arevai S 129A No. 1, Avarua.

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application
by TE KURA VEIKIRANGI to revoke the Succession
Order made on the 10.5.1932 to the interest of
ANGENE PARAU TARAARE in the
land Ngatipa S 172 Avarua.

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by
TE KURA VEIKIRANGI to revoke the Succession
Order made on the 10.5.1932 to the interest of
ANANI in the land Ngatipa S. 172 Avarua.

Mr Teeu Kamana for applicant
Mrs Terangi Little — objector
Date of hearing: 14 August 2002

REASONS FOR DECISION BY HINGSTON J

HEARING

The applicant's case is quite simple. She was legally adopted by Ngapoko Tai but this evidence was not before the Court when the Orders being attacked was made.

She argues that she is the person entitled to succeed and this order should be revoked. She has succeeded to other lands of the deceased. A copy of the adoption order was produced by the applicant.

Mrs Little appearing as one of the persons who would be dispossessed argued that her line though only derived through a "feeding child" were by blood related to the deceased and therefore the succession order complained off should not be disturbed. She also submitted that the deceased family did not recognise for succession adopted persons who were not of the blood-line. Notwithstanding that she appeared to concede that her family would agree to the applicant taking some of the land.

The applicant submitted that there had been an agreement amongst Ngapoko and her siblings that "feeding children" should not succeed as well that her blood link to the family could be proven.

CONCLUSION

The applicant having been legally adopted by Ngapoko was clearly entitled to have her claim considered when the orders complained of were made. The question of whether she had a right to succeed in terms of the customs of this family was a matter that would have been traversed if the Court at that time had been aware of the legal adoption. The Court being unaware of the legal adoption is, I believe, sufficient cause to intervene and revoke the succession orders attacked by the applicant.

JUDGE

That the parties be advised that an application de novo should be made for succession to the deceased and that the persons dispossessed by this order are still eligible to apply.

Copy to:	Applicant
	Mrs Little