Land known as "Mt. Bulebe" in the Sialum District of the Morobe Province, In re [2005] PGPLC 2; DC172 (26 August 2005)

DC172

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

In The Matter Of The Continuing Dispute Over The Land Known As "Mt. Bulebe" In The Sialum District Of The Morobe Province

And

In The Matter Of The Land Disputes Settlement Act

And

In The Matter Of An Agreement Sanctioned Pursuant To Section 31 (2) (H) Thereof And Where Sections 18, 19, 20, 28, & 32 Thereof Applied Generally.

Lae: M M Pupaka
2005: 26th August

26th August 2005

M. M. PUAKA: This was one of the Provincial Land Court (appeal) cases listed for a preliminary call-over on 15th August 2005. And this is one of three such cases summarily dealt with, as warranted by the cases’ specific circumstances.

Brief Facts

On or around May 4th 2004 about seven (7) different clans reached agreement over the ‘Mt. Bulebe’ land, as a result of an apparently successful mediation. They then applied before Principal Magistrate Orim Karapo for approval. Mr. Karapo, sitting alone (without Mediators) as a Local Land Court heard the application and approved the terms of the agreement sought to be sanctioned. The sanctioned heads of agreement than took on force and effect as Local Land Court orders in accordance with the Land Dispute Settlement Act.

Subsequently certain other clans asserting usage rights and ownership rights to the land lodged appeals against the approved orders, quite obviously disputing their exclusion to the land use agreement and disputing the heads of agreement. It now seems about six (6) or more other clans are disputing their exclusion and are asserting their rights to be included.

The Law

The approved terms of settlement are by law considered to be and have full force and take on effect as orders of the Local Land Court.

The Principle of Perpetuity & Effect of Challenge

The terms of settlement are only binding between the parties to the agreement as long as there is complete acceptance of the terms. The force and effect of such terms are negated once there is any level of rejection and dispute by any party to the agreement or when a party who feels aggrieved by the settlement agreement raises issue with any of the terms of settlement.

Such orders are consequent upon successful mediations. The mediated results, though initially considered successful – leading to the approved Local Land Court orders, stand failed and the orders are a nullity.

Consequently there is only one outcome that can be borne out as a matter of law and equity. There must be a full hearing of all persons or parties who have registered any interests over the land and its use. That can only happen in the Local Land Court.

Ergo I order as follows.

Court Order

1. The 'Mt. Bulebe' customary land dispute, including its ownership and usage rights, is remitted to the Local Land Court for full hearing.
   
2. The Local Land Court (Lae) is directed to set a date for a pre-trial conference to identify all affected persons or parties or clans and plan for a proper hearing of the matter.
   
3. All affected and aggrieved parties are directed to liaise with the Local Land Court (Lae) and register their interests to be heard.
   

So ordered and directed under my hand this 26th day of August 2005.

M. M. Pupaka
Principal Magistrate