PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Court of Appeal of Kiribati

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Court of Appeal of Kiribati >> 2010 >> [2010] KICA 16

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Nakareke v Nenebo [2010] KICA 16; Land Appeal 04 of 2010 (18 August 2010)

IN THE KIRIBATI COURT OF APPEAL
LAND JURISDICTION
HELD AT BETIO


Land Appeal 4 of 2010


BETWEEN:


TEUNNANG NAKAREKE
Appellant


AND:


MOOTI NENEBO AND OTHERS
Respondents


Before: Tompkins JA
Fisher JA
Williams JA


Michael Takabwebwe for Appellant
Banuera Berina for Respondents


Date of Hearing: 14 August 2010
Date of Judgment: 18 August 2010


JUDGMENT OF THE COURT


[1] On 9 October 2009 an appeal by the present appellant came before the Chief Justice but there was no appearance for or by the appellant at that hearing. The Chief Justice struck out the appeal but then extended for one month until 9 November 2009 the time within which the appellant might apply to reinstate the appeal. The appellant failed to take any further step within the extended time but made a late application on 13 November 2009. That application was dismissed by the Chief Justice on 8 January 2010 as being out of time.


[2] On 29 April 2010 the applicant sought to renew her application before the Chief Justice to re-open her appeal. After hearing argument, the Chief Justice then again refused to allow the appeal to be re-opened. The applicant now appeals to the Court of Appeal against that decision.


[3] A judge has power to reinstate a matter in the list after it has been struck out upon non attendance of a party. However when the Judge after hearing argument refuses to allow an appeal to be re-opened, the appeal stands dismissed and the dissatisfied party is limited to whatever rights of appeal may be available.


[4] In the present case the Court of Appeal Act S10(1)(b) confines the appeal to this court "on any ground of appeal which involves a question of law only".


[5] The present appeal complains as to the manner of exercise on judicial discretion. It is not a ground of appeal which involves a question of law only.


[6] The appeal is incompetent. The appeal will be dismissed on the basis that this Court lacks jurisdiction.


[7] The appellant shall pay the respondents' costs of the appeal to be agreed or fixed by the Registrar.


Tompkins JA
Fisher JA
Williams JA


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/ki/cases/KICA/2010/16.html