Kiribati Housing Corporation v Kiang [2019] KIHC 128; Civil Case 86 of 2015 (9 July 2019)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI 2019

HIGH COURT CIVIL CASE 86 OF 2015

[KIRIBATI HOUSING CORPORATION APPLICANT
[
BETWEEN [AND
[
[TEKEA KIANG 1^ST RESPONDENT
[PERSONS UNKNOWN 2^ND RESPONDENT

Before: The Hon Chief Justice Sir John Muria

13 & 20 November 2017

Ms Taaira Timeon for the Applicant
Mr Tabibiri Tentau for the First Respondent

JUDGMENT

Muria, CJ: The applicant applies to the Court for an order that the applicant recover possession of the area adjacent to House NLL 14, Labour Line, Bikenibeu North pursuant to section 3 of the Squatters (Recovery of Lands) Act 2005.

2. The land in question, Ribono 663a/1a Bikenibeu North, is leased by the Government of Kiribati. By a Deed of Assignment dated 31 December 1986 the said plot of land had been given to the applicant. These facts are not disputed.

3. The Respondent’s case is that he was given permission by a landowner by the name of Arawatau Miito to reside on the land. This was confirmed by
Mr Miito in his affidavit of 10 November 2017 filed in support of the respondent.

4. What is surprising is that the land Ribono 663a/1a Bikenibeu is leased by the Government and assigned to the Applicant. The landowners including Arawatau Miito are receiving rent from the Government for the lease of the land. Yet, the landowners are clearly giving permission to others to come and settle on the very land that they had leased to the Government. There are so many cases coming before the Courts under the same circumstances. It appears that the Lessor and/or the Assignee do not have any machinery to enforce their rights under the Lease or the Assignment. As a result cases of this nature are clogging the Court Lists.

5. Both parties in this case accept that the land is leased by the Government and Assigned to the Applicant Kiribati Housing Corporation. The question of boundary determination is irrelevant, unless the Lease is only over a portion of the land and that the respondent claims that he settles on the unleased part of the land.

6. The evidence in this case does not show anything else other than that the land Ribono 663a/1a is leased by the Government and assigned to the applicant. The Lessor and/or the assignee (Kiribati Housing Corporation) have the right in law to enjoy quiet possession of the land until the lease expires.

7. While the lease and the assignment still subsist, unless special arrangement has been made, those who come onto the land without permission of the Lessor and/or the assignee are trespassers and are liable to be evicted from the leased land.

8. In the present case, the applicant has satisfied the Court that it is entitled to take possession of the area of land adjacent to House NLL 14, Labour Line, Bikenibeu North in land Ribono 663a/1a pursuant to section 3 of the Squatters (Recovery of Lands) Act 2005. I so order. Applicant seeks no order on costs and so no costs ordered.

ORDER: 1. The Applicant to recover possession of the area surrounding or adjacent to House NLL 14, Labour Line, Bikenibeu North in Ribono 663a/1a.

2. The Respondent shall have 90 days within which to vacate the said area of land.

3. No order on costs.

Dated the 9^th day of July 2019

SIR JOHN MURIA
Chief Justice