Tenanoa v Taam [2004] KIHC 208; Land Appeal 22 of 2003 (13 August 2004)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
LAND JURISDICTION
HELD AT BETIO
REPUBLIC OF KIRIBATI

High Court Land Appeal 22 of 2003

Between:

IOTAAKE TENANOA
Appellant

And:

OIKEN TAAM
BAAUA BWEBWETAAKE
Respondents

For the Appellant: Mr Banuera Berina
For the Respondents: Mr Aomoro Amten

Date of Hearing: 13 August 2004

ORDER
(Ex Tempore)

It was expected that Baaua would give evidence today but he did not appear and his counsel, Mr Amten could not explain the non-appearance: he had been notified and Mr Amten had expected him to be present.

We proceeded nevertheless with the appeal. The appellant’s complaint is that the presiding magistrate on Abaiang is related to Baaua and so should not have sat on the case. Mr Amten could not dispute that relationship in Baaua’s absence.

A magistrate should not sit on a case if he is related to or a friend of a party. That is because his relationship or friendship may affect his judgment: he may or it may look as though he may, favour that party.

The appeal is allowed, the decision of the Magistrate’s Court is quashed and the case returned to the Abaiang Magistrates’ Court for rehearing. On the new hearing no magistrate who is related to or a friend of any party may sit: he must disqualify himself.

On 1 April 2004 we ordered the appellant to pay into Court $100 for fares and on account of the subsistence of one witness. The money is still lying in Court. We now order that it be paid out to Mr Berina on account of his clients.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice

BETERO KAITANGARE
Magistrate

RARATU IEITA
Magistrate