Dora v Bouro [2004] SBCA 3; CA-CAC 010 of 2004 (20 July 2004)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Civil Appeal No. 010 of 2004

HENRY STAR DORA
(Trading as Treasure Islands Shinning)

-v-

SIMEON BOURO

Date of Hearing: 16^th July 2004
Date of Ruling: 20^th July 2004

C. Hapa for the Appellant.
G. Suri for the Respondent.

RULING

Kabui, J.: This is an application for leave to appeal brought under section 19(a) of the Court of Appeal Act (Cap. 6). The appeal is against part of the order I made on 4^th June 2004. The order was perfected on 7^th June 2004. The ground of appeal is that I made the "no order as to costs" order in the wrong exercise of my discretion as the trial judge. The appellant was the loser in the court below in that the default judgment entered in his favour on 22^nd March 2004 as set aside in favour of the Respondent on the ground that the Respondent had a defence on the merits. The main thrust of the appellant's argument was that the "no order as to costs" order was prejudicial to the appellant in that it failed to take into account of the costs that the appellant would have incurred in enforcing the default judgment such as execution and garnishee proceedings. That is costs thrown away. I think there is merit in the grounds of appeal though in this case no execution proceeding had taken place and no costs incurred. Eighteen working days had lapsed before the summons to set aside was filed by the Respondent. Leave is granted to appeal.

F.O. Kabui
Puisne Judge