Marutaake v Marutaake [2009] KIHC 23; Civil Review 1 of 2008 (4 June 2009)

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

High Court Civil Review 1 of 2008

BETWEEN:

TERETIA MARUTAAKE
APPLICANT

AND:

AKOIA MARUTAAKE
ATTORNEY GENERAL IRO
MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND SOCIAL
DEVELOPMENT
DEFENDANTS

For the Applicant: Ms Abunaba Takabwebwe
For the Defendants: Ms Maere Kirata

Date of Hearing: 4 June 2009

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

Application to review the decision of a Single Magistrate sitting as a late registration assessor. It is said he failed to comply with the proviso to S.17 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Ordinance:-

Provided that a late registration assessor shall not grant an order for the registration of the birth of an applicant requiring his own birth to be registered unless he is satisfied that no qualified informant is available able to give evidence of the particulars required for registration of the birth.

I take the facts from the affidavit of the applicant, N. Teretia. Her complaint is that N. Akoia registered herself as the eldest daughter of N. Teretia’s late father. N. Teretia contests that N. Akoia is the eldest daughter of her father.

N. Teretia only found out about the registration when she went to get a copy of her own birth certificate.

As she was not a party in CN 977/07 her only remedy is this Application for Review.

I have read the minute of the case:

From all the evidence given by this lady this court is satisfied and accepts the date of birth.

No mention of satisfying himself that no qualified informant was available. I infer with confidence from the minute that the Single Magistrate did not comply with the proviso, did not satisfy himself that no qualified informant was available.

As it appears from the Statutory Declaration of Etiria Tanaki and Terengaiti Nabetari that the facts may be in dispute the application must be heard again. All those interested in the matter must be given notice of the rehearing and an opportunity to be present and heard.

Application for review of CN 977/07 granted. Decision of the Single Magistrate sitting as a late registration assessor quashed and the case returned for hearing again by another Single Magistrate in accordance with these reasons.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice