Eron v Nogo [2018] PGDC 8; DC3095 (5 January 2018)

DC3095
PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE

SITTING IN ITS CIVIL JURISDICTION]

DCCi 161 of 2017
BETWEEN

DOLLY ERON & ERONNASALO

Complainants

AND

KIPSY NOGO

Defendant

Goroka: P KAUMBA, LLB(PNG)

2017: December 14
2018: January 5

CIVIL:

Cases Cited:
Nil

References:
Nil

Counsels:

Lawyer for the Complainants,In persons.

Lawyer for the Defendant,In person.

5^th January, 2018

DECISION ON DAMAGES

P KAUMBA, Magistrate:The complaint was filed in court on an unknown date in September 2017 alleging that theDefendant without reasonable excuse made defamatory remarks namely YUTUPELA MAN BLONG YU SANGUMA, TOILET,BASTARD,RUBBISH,PIPIA DRINK KOK WARA BLO MI( you and your husband are witches, belong to the toilet, bastard, rubbish, drink my semen) or words to that effect were spoken by the defendant in front of quite a number of people which affected the complainants and claimed damages to the tune of K5000.00 pursuant section 5 of the Defamation Act.

2. The case was heard and decision on liability was handed down on the 14^th of December 2017 and the complainants were given 7 days to file affidavits and submission on assessment of damages and the case was adjourned to the 22^nd of December 2017 for decision.

3. On the 22^nd of December 2017 the court noted that defendant has yet to file his affidavit and submission on damages so the case was further adjourned to the 5^th of January 2017 and the time for the complainants to file affidavits and submission on damages were extended to 2^nd of January 2018.

4. I note that the complainants have failed to file their affidavits and submission on damages and the issue now is whether this court can give the complainants a further extension to file their affidavits and submission on damages or not?.

THE LAW

(1)DISTRICT COURT ACT

22. GENERAL ANCILLARY JURISDICTION.

5. Subject to this Act, a court as regards a cause of action for the time being within its jurisdiction, shall, in proceedings before it-

(a) grant such relief, redress or remedy, or combination remedies, whether absolute or conditional; and
(b) give the same effect to every ground of defence or counterclaim, whether equitable or legal,

as ought to be given in a similar case by the National Court and in as full and ample a manner.

(2) Failure to comply with a court order is a punishable offence under section 277 of the District Court Act.

(3) Public Policy.
As a matter of public policy cases should be dealt with expeditiously and delays caused by parties will consume the court’s precious time and the courts must not condone such delay.

(4) Equity- One of the maxims of equity is that Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without remedy.

1. FINDINGS ON FACTS,LAW AND ISSUES.
   
   • (1) On the 14^th of December 2017 the complainant’s were directed to file theirs affidavits and submission on damages within 7 days and they failed to do so and were given another extension to do so on the 22^nd of December 2017 and they have failed to do again.
   • (2) The court has power to penalise them under the above provisions of the law and public policy and I will hereby dispense with requirement of the complainants right to be heard on assessment of damages and proceeds to make an assessment based on evidence already before the court. Furthermore I also note that most of the words used by the Defendant are insulting and provocative words which are actionable per se that is without prove of evidence under common law. The only words that has a defamatory imputation on the complainant are the words‘Sanguma and Rubbish pipia’ but the complainants have not produced evidence to show how it has affected their reputation and standing in the community.
   • (3) In the circumstances I cannot just throw out the complainants’ case. Equity requires that I should give a judgement for the complainants and the Complainants are entitled to compensation in a nominal sum of K1500 in damages but I will reduce the same by K500.00 because the second defendant took the law into his own hands to assault the Defendant. Secondly the complainants did not report the defendant to police for them to charge the Defendant under the Summary offences Act and be dealt with by the District Court which is not good for enforcement of criminal law and the complainants damages should be reduced by K500.00.
   • (4) I also consider the fact that defendant is a villager and may not be able to pay cash compensation and the fact that the defendant and complainants are from the same area, I will make an alternative order too for part payment in kind which the defendant may choose to settle the dispute with the complainants once and for all and restore good relations between the parties.
     
2. Cost.

Cost is a discretionary matter for the judge. Cost should follow the event.

3. ORDER.

The Courts formal orders are:

1.The Defendant shall pay K1000.00 to the complainants or alternatively kill a pig worth K400.00 and give it together with K600.00 cash to the complainants within 30 days of this order. In default warrant of execution be issued.

2. The complainants cost’s to be paid by the Defendant to be taxed if not agreed.

Counsels:

Lawyer for the Complainants, In persons.

Lawyer for the Defendant, In person.