Bwebwenibeia v Bwebwenibeia [2023] KIHC 61; Land Appeal 10 of 2020 (1 September 2023)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI

HIGH COURT LAND APPEAL 10 of 2020

BETWEEN: Iotia Bwebwenibeia and Antiera Bwebwenibeia
Appellants

AND: Mwakaua Bwebwenibeia
Respondent

Date of Hearing: 3 August 2023
Date of judgment: 1 September 2023
Appearances: Ms Taira Timeon for the Appellants
Mr Banuera Berina for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal case simply challenges the Single Magistrate’s ruling in the Bairiki Magistrates Court’s case number BD 113/18 which was delivered on 27^th March, 2020.
   
2. BD 133/18 was a land boundary determination case which applied for the subdivision of Teabanimate, land plot number 816i/1e in Betio, between the appellants and respondent who are the bona-fide owners of the said land following the proper transfer of the land title from their deceased father in Betlan 508/11. The hearing of the subdivision claim did not proceed as it was opposed by the appellants who argued that being a land matter concerning a leasehold land, the Magistrates Court therefore does not have the jurisdiction to hear the subdivision application.
   
3. The appellants relied on section 20A(2) of the Native Lands Ordinance to support their objection to the subdivision application. This section reads: “Before deciding to approve subdivision of land under this section, the Court must be satisfied that those entitled as co-owners have consented to the proposed subdivision, and that following the subdivision, there will be sufficient land in each resulting plots to support from such plot the family members expected to reside in the plots.”
   
4. In interpreting section 20A(2), as referred to by the appellant, the Single Magistrate ruled that the Magistrate Court does have the power or jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate over leasehold lands (native lands leased by government).
   
5. According to the Appellants, the Single Magistrate has misconstrued section 20A(2) of the Native Lands Ordinance 2000 (as amended), hence this appeal.
   
6. However, the Panel does not agree that the said amendment takes away the power of the Magistrates Court to hear boundary determination cases over native lands. Accordingly, the Panel finds the Single Magistrate’s decision, that the Magistrate Court does have the jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of the application for the subdivision of Teabanimate plot number 816i/1e in Betio, proper and has not erred in law nor fact, as claimed by the Appellant.
   
7. For the above reasons the panel make the following orders,
   

1. The appeal is dismissed;
   
2. The decision in Case Number BD 113/18, which was delivered on 27^th March, 2020, is hereby upheld;
   
3. The matter is to be remitted to the Magistrate Court for continuance of hearing Case No. BD 113/18;
   
4. Costs to be taxed if not agreed.
   

ABUERA URUABA
Commissioner of the High Court

RETETA RIMON
Land Appeal Magistrate

RITETI MANINRAKA
Land Appeal Magistrate