Tinoka v Maere [1996] KIHC 75; HCLA 193.90 (25 July 1996)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
HELD AT MARAKEI
(BEFORE THE HON R LUSSICK C.J.)

HCLA 193/90

BETWEEN:

TEBARINE TINOKA
Appellant

AND:

BAURO MAERE
Respondent

Appellant represented by Tiantaake Tebarine
Respondent in person

JUDGMENT

The appellant is deceased and is represented by her daughter Tiantaake, as was the case in the proceedings in the lower court.

We find there was nothing wrong with the procedure followed by the lower court. The magistrates went to the site and heard the sworn evidence of both parties, who were given the opportunity of showing the court the position of the boundary they claimed. The respondent, an old man, testified that his boundary had been shown to him by his parents long ago. His father Maere had cared for the land which had all originally belonged to N. Kaua, a close daughter of Maere. Tiantaake, on the other hand, was unable to remember, or did not know, who had taken care of the land in the past. She conceded that the respondent may be correct. Nevertheless, she pointed out the boundary where she had been told it was.

After considering the evidence, the land magistrates' court determined that the parties had the same boundary on the west and then fixed the eastern boundary at a cement marker placed by surveyors near a babai pit.

The appellant has not demonstrated to us how the land magistrates' court may have erred in coming to this decision. The court made certain findings of fact which we would not be entitled to interfere with.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Right of appeal explained.

THE HON R B LUSSICK
Chief Justice
(25/07/96)

TEKAIE TENANORA
Magistrate
(25/07/96)

BETERO KAITANGARE
Magistrate
(25/07/96)