Ka v Wantape [2001] PGDC 5; DC146 (14 August 2001)

DC146

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

CASE NO 49 OF 2000

BETWEEN

BRAS KA

Complainant

AND

NATHAN WANTAPE

First Defendant

GOVERNMENT COUNCIL MUL LOCAL LEVEL

Second Defendant

Mt Hagen

Appa

17 October 2000
14 August 2001

JUDGMENT

The complainant claims that as of 10th October 1997 the first defendant, President of Mul Local Level Council (LLGC) had negotiated on behalf of the Government of Western Highlands Province (Rev. Fr. Robert Lak) for hire of complainant's 25 seater bus Reg. No. P6940 for the purpose of campaigning for President. There was no dispute that they negotiated and agreed to hire the bus for 32 days. However, there was dispute that the bus was actually used for less than three (3) days only. The first defendant said in his affidavit that he did hire the bus as of 10th October, 1997 for 32 days but used it for only three (3) days and not 32 days. However, on this issue, an invoice was raised for payment after the hire had expired on 3/11/97 for K16, 000.00 on the basis of K500.00 day for 32 days and was acknowledged and signed by the first defendant himself for K16, 000.00. The first defendant then forwarded the invoice (No. 54560) to the Governor for payment.

The Governor received the invoice and noted on the President's covering letter that no verbal approval was given but agreed to pay half of the claim and directed that Mul Local Level Government council meets the other half out of the District support grant funds. One can clearly see from this transition that liability was not seriously disputed. The Governor's Office had already paid complainant K8, 000.00 in 1998. He complainant is now suing the Mul LLGC for the remainder of K8, 000.00.

The Mul LLGC comes under the Administration of the Governor and as such the Mul Council had been directed to pay complainant K8, 000.00. Since liability is established and with the WHPG not being made a party to this proceeding, Mul Council is the one to settle.

On quantum, although the first defendant disputed the number of hire days, this dispute was rendered insignificant in light of what has been discussed above. Since it is a quantified claim approved by the respective authorities, I see no reason to make any reduction.

I therefore enter judgment for the complainant for a sum of K8, 000.00 plus 8% interest to run from date of summons to date of settlement and nominal costs of the proceeding. The judgment debt is to be settled by Mul Local Level Government Council.

In Person: Complainant
Warner Shand Lawyers: Defendant