Wate v Wate [2023] SBCA 12; SICOA-CAC 17 of 2021 (28 April 2023)

IN THE SOLOMON ISLANDS COURT OF APPEAL

Case name:	Wate v Wate
Citation:
Decision date:
Nature of Jurisdiction	Appeal from Judgment of the High Court of Solomon Islands (Faukona, J)
Court File Number(s):	17 of 2021
Parties:	Ansa Wate and Richy Hou v Chris Wate, southern Forest Industry, Global (SI) Limited
Hearing date(s):	21 April 2023
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Goldsbrough P Hansen JA Wilson JA
Representation:	Upwe B for Appellant Nimepo D for Respondent
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Court of Appeal Rules 22
Cases cited:
ExTempore/Reserved:	Reserved
Allowed/Dismissed:	Dismissed
Pages:	1-3

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

1. After a notice of appeal was filed on 5^th August 2021 against a decision of the High Court published on 9^th July 2021, the Appellants filed an application for the Court of Appeal to receive further evidence on the appeal. This application was brought under Rule 22 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
2. Rule 22 of the Court of Appeal Rules provides: -

Further Evidence

22. - (1) The Court shall have full discretionary power to receive further evidence upon questions of fact, which evidence may be taken by oral examination in Court, by affidavit, or by deposition taken before an examiner or commissioner.

• (2) Evidence under this rule, subject to paragraph (3), may be given without special leave.
  • (3) Leave on special grounds must be granted before further evidence can be given-
• (a) upon an appeal from a final judgment;
• (b) upon an appeal from a judgment after the hearing of a trial or matter upon the merits;

Provided always that no such leave shall be necessary in any case as to matters which have occurred after the date of decision from which the appeal is brought.

3. This is an appeal against a final judgment, and the proposed evidence does not concern matters which occurred after the date of the decision.
4. The application seeks admission of evidence from a person who gave evidence at the trial.
5. The opportunity to give evidence is to be taken at trial rather than by seeking to admit further evidence otherwise available at the time of trial, which was not then proffered.
6. The application to admit further evidence as proposed within this application is dismissed. Costs of the application are to be paid by the applicant Appellant to the Respondent on an indemnity basis, such costs to be agreed or assessed.

Goldsbrough P
Hansen JA
Wilson JA