Kamoriki v Taomati [2010] KIHC 126; High Court Civil Case 142 of 2010 (15 November 2010)

In the High Court of Kiribati
Civil Jurisdiction
Held at Betio
Republic of Kiribati

High Court Civil Case 142 of 2010

Between:

Booka Kamoriki & Others
Applicants

And:

Ilaisa Taomati
1st Respondent

Tebaieta Kamoriki
2nd Respondent

For the Applicants: Ms Botika Maitinnara
For the 1st Respondent: Mr Banuera Berina

Dates of Hearing: 15 November 2010

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

Application for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision in CN 348/1993 concerning the sale of land Antenon 773i. The applicants through one of them, Nei Booka Kamoriki, assert they did not know of the decision: they were co-owners and should have been parties. Nei Booka returned from Marakei to live in Tarawa in 2003. She said she did not find out about the 1993 decision until a few months ago. Yet what I find on the balance of probabilities to be her signature appears on a number of documents (Exhibits R2 to R4) in 1993 and her name appears in the minutes of CN 249/98 concerning "R 3918 (773-i)" in the Bairiki Magistrates' Court (Exhibit R1). They indicate that she did know of the transaction.

I also must consider the position of the first respondent, Nei Ilaisa Taomati. For 17 years now she has been undisturbed in title to the land. The principle of certainty of title is a very strong one. After so long title should not as a rule be disturbed. As the Court of Appeal said in CA 4/09 Matou Tabora v Taokaruru Uratarawa and Dr Tetaua Taitai", "Normally a delay of 17 years would be fatal to an application -----".

This is a normal case: no exceptional circumstances.

I have to exercise my discretion whether to extend time within which to bring this application. Both because on the balance of probabilities I find the applicants did know at the time of CN 348/1993 and because of the long delay in making the application I do not extend the time.

The application accordingly fails.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice