Kirabuke v Barekiau [2025] KIHC 22; Civil Case 03035 of 2024 (8 May 2025)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI

HIGH COURT CIVIL CASE 2024-03035

BETWEEN: BAIRENGA KIRABUKE

Applicant

AND: BAKATE BAREKIAU

1^st Respondent

AND: TIITA MONOKA

2^nd Respondent

AND: MOKIANA EKEBATI

3^rd Respondent

Date of Hearing: 10 April, 11 April (w/subs)
Date of Judgment: 8 May 2025

Appearances: Ms Batitea Tekanito for the Applicant
Ms. Turia Toto Ruaia for the 1^st Respondent
Ms. Taotere Korimara for 2^nd Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. The applicant applied for the Court’s declaration regarding the magistrate court’s jurisdiction to conduct the boundary determination in case BD 46/20 concerning the land Tabito 762o/2e. The magistrate court refused to conduct the boundary determination on the ground that there are several competing interests in respect of the concerned land.
   
2. The applicant filed an Originating Summons for six declarations to be considered by this Court. At the hearing on 10 April, all three Counsels agreed on declaration three, which is to compel the magistrate court to conduct the boundary determination of the applicant's and respondents' lands, as they believe there are no competing interests however, the boundaries between the various landowners must be established.
3. In its decision, the magistrate court was concerned about three cases related to the land in dispute. The three cases are as follows;
   
   • - CN 17/62, the ruling states that the land, Tabito 762o, must be registered under Tamuera Tekabu with his sisters and issues of Tikoro.
     
   • - CN 74/84, the ruling states that Nei Bairenga Kirabuke must be registered on a portion of Tabito 762o/2e.
     
   • - Betlan 263/20, the ruling states that Nei Akee Bamatang with Issues of her sisters and brothers for the Issues of Nei Aribo and Nei Tabuti with brothers and sisters for the issues of Nei Teretia and Robuti for issues of Nei Tebau Tekabu must be registered on Tabito 762o following the decision of CN 17/62. It was mentioned in the decision of this case that Tamuera Tekabu has three sisters named Nei Aribo, Nei Titirou and Nei Tebau. The decision concerns the registration of the issues of two of the sisters; Nei Aribo and Nei Tebau.
     
4. After reviewing these three cases, I find the following;
   • - The first registration in CN 17/62 registered Tamuera Tekabu with sisters and issues of Tikoro over the land, Tabito 762o.
     
   • - For the second registration in CN 74/84, Nei Bairenga received a plot in Tabito 762o from Tamuera Tekabu as a gift. This decision shows that Nei Bainrenga was not given the whole of Tabito 762o. Following this registration, her plot was numbered Tabito 762o/2e.
     
   • - In the third registration in Betlan 263/20, the court registered the Issues of Nei Aribo and Nei Tabuti over Tabito 762o following the decision of CN 17/62. Betlan 263/20 mentions that Nei Aribo and Nei Tabuti are sisters of Tamuera Tekabu, who co-owned the land, Tabito 762o, with their brother, Tamuera Tekabu in CN 17/62.
     
5. In another case, Bailan 599/20, Issues of Nei Aribo Tekabu and Issues of Tebau Tekabu sued Etita Tamuera for Tamuera Tekabu and Bainrenga Kirabuke on their claim that Bairenga Kirabuke was registered on Tabito by Tamuera through fraud as he was not the sole owner of the land. It was mentioned in that case that Tamuera Tekabu has three sisters, namely Nei Aribo Tekabu, Nei Titirou Tekabu and Nei Tebau Tekabu. The court dismissed the claim of fraud since there was no fraud since Bainrenga received her land within Tabito 762o by Tamuera Tekabu who was one of the landowners of Tabito 762o. The court further stated that Tamuera did not misinform the court as he did not claim to be the sole owner of Tabito 762o. It was clear in that decision that there is a remaining portion of Tabito after Bainrenga was given a plot.
   
6. In BD 46/20, Bairenga applied for a boundary determination of her portion on Tabito. The magistrate's court refused to entertain the case based on the magistrate's belief that the land has competing interests since Nei Akee, Nei Tabuti mtmm, and Robuti are registered on Tabito 762o in Betlan 263/20 following the decision of CN 17/62. According to the magistrate, they are now registered with Tamuera Tekabu over Tabito 762o, but Tamuera Tekabu has given away this land to Bainrenga in CN 74/84.
   
7. I have stated above that Bainrenga was given only a portion of Tabito 762o; there is remaining land for the other landowners. Parties, through their Counsels, agreed that a boundary determination can be carried out. The magistrate court should conduct a boundary determination of Bainrenga’s plot on Tabito. All interested parties must be invited. The case is returned to the magistrate court for hearing.
   

Order accordingly.

THE HON TETIRO SEMILOTA MAATE MOANIBA
Chief Justice