Global Imports and Exports Ltd v Attorney General [2011] KIHC 67; Civil Case 46 of 2010 (8 November 2011)

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

HIGH COURT CIVIL CASE 46 OF 2010

BETWEEN:

GLOBAL IMPORTS & EXPORTS LTD
APPLICANT

AND:

AG iro MFED
THIRD PARTY

FOR APPLICANT: TAOING TAOABA
FOR THIRD PARTY: ERETA BRUCE
Date of Hearing: 8 NOVEMBER 2011

JUDGMENT

This is an application for the Third Party to pay the cost of $3,702.20 to the applicant on behalf of the defendant, Kiribati Supply Company Ltd, as stated in Order dated 17 August 2011. The basis of this application is as follows:

- The applicant had tried to serve the Order on the defendant but could not find their registered office. Their office has been dismantled, and

- That it was the Third Party who paid the principal amount of the judgment against the defendant, being $57,630.30.

Ms Bruce argued that they should be involved or have a say when the bill of cost was determined. I rejected this argument. They could not have known what to argue on when the bill of cost was determined. Their involvement in the case is only because they control the sale of KSCL.

Based on the submissions of both Counsels and pursuant to Order 18 rule 10 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 1964 I decided that the Third Party should pay this cost on behalf of the defendant from the sale money. I based my decision on the following grounds:

- The applicant had tried to serve the Order on the defendant but could not find their registered office. Their office has been dismantled, and

- It was established from previous proceedings that the Third Party has control over the sale money, money received as purchase price of the defendant, Kiribati Supply Company Ltd, and

- That it was established from the oral examination proceedings that the defendant has no means to pay for the judgment debt but relies on the sale money (price of KSCL) that is controlled by the Third Party (MFED), and

- That it was the Third Party who paid the principal amount of the judgment against the defendant, being $57,630.30 from the sale money.

I therefore Order that Cost should be paid by the Third Party.

TETIRO M SEMILOTA
COMMISSIONER