Mana v Mana [1997] SBHC 35; HC-CC 288 of 1996 (24 June 1997)

HIGH COURT OF THE SOLOMON ISLANDS

Civil Case No. 288 of 1996

ter">ANN MANA

v

PETER MANA

Before: Lue: Lungole-Awich, J

Hearing: 26 May 1997 - Judgment: 24 June 1997

Counsel: M Samuel for the Petitioner - P Tegavota for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

LUNGOLE-AWICH, J:

The petitioner, Ann Mana, the wife of Peter Mana has proved their marriage in 1979 and that they have one child of the marriage, Irene Mana who is nearly 18 years old. The respondent, Peter Mana admitted adultery with Mary Lado, the woman he now lives with. He has on the other hand led convincing evidence that the petitioner herself committed adultery for which the respondent received payment of $200 as compensation. The petitioner left on 14.8.1995, following a fight. The two have never lived together since. There had been several fights in the marriage which seemed to arise because of adultery on both sides. It is not convincing that they were instances of cruelty. The offence of adultery has been proved by both the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner has been open enough to file discretionary statement about her own adultery and the respondent frankly admitted his adultery. Based on both parties adultery, I issue decree nisi to dissolve the marriage between the parties celebrated on 15 June 1979 at Honiara. Unless good cause is shown within 3 months from today's date either party may apply to the Registrar for the decree nisi to be made absolute.

The petitioner is employed by Solomon Voice, a newspaper. In view of adultery having been proved by both parties, I order that each party bears own costs.

The child of the marriage, Irene Mana is nearly 18 years old. She is still at school. Both sides did not raise doubt that her school expenses are being paid by the father. It is undesirable that custody order for her be made. She may decide where she will be based. I expect her to visit either parent on staying basis. So far there has been no complaint that the respondent does not maintain her, and he pays school fees. Maintenance order about the child is unnecessary now. Should the situation change, application may be made to court.

The question of alimony for the wife and property has not been properly canvassed during the trial. Leave is granted for parties to have the case re-listed for the purpose of trying the issue. In that event proper and adequate evidence will have to be led. Affidavit filed in advance would be useful. Order for interim maintenance for the petitioner is refused because she is employed. Also sufficient evidence about the means of the respondent must be adduced.

Dated this 24th day of June 1997

At the High Court, Honiara

Sam Lungole-Awich,
Judge