Kossa Football Club v Solomon Islands Football Federation [2000] SBHC 14; HC-CC 110 of 2000 (7 April 2000)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Civil Case No. 110 of 2000

KOSSA FOOTBALL CLUB

-V-

SOLOMON ISLANDS FOOTBALL FEDERATION

High Court of Solomon Islands
(Lungole-Awich, J)

Date of Hearing: 7 April 2000
Date of Judgment: 7 April 2000

Judgment: Ex tempore

Mr J Hauirae for the plaintiff
Mr M Alufurai & Mr M Kausimae, Officials of the defendant

JUDGMENT

(Lungole-Awich, J): The plaintiff/applicant, Kossa Football Club, brought this case as an urgent application for interim injunction order. It asked that it be allowed to make the application ex parte because it was urgent. Yes, the application was urgent, it being brought about 4 pm today, Friday 7^th April 2000 for determining whether the football tournament due to commence tomorrow, Saturday 8^th April 2000 should be stopped. However, I saw no reason in the urgency, to warrant hearing the application ex parte. If the defendant/respondent is served with the application and notice of hearing today, it will not defeat the purpose of the application, which is to stop matches commencing only tomorrow. The respondent has office in Honiara, it is not impossible to serve them for hearing of the urgent application at short notice. The Court of course will have to attend to the application before tomorrow. I refused to hear the application ex parte and ordered that the respondent be served. Representatives of the respondent then attended the hearing 2 hours later. They provided very useful information so that the correct and fair determination could be made.

The case was this: Solomon Islands Football Federation, SIFF, took a decision to hold a knock-out competition between the 4 top clubs following the year's League Championship competitions. The knock out competition has money prices, one of which is that the winner gets $1,000. There is the added benefit of sharing in the gate takings in the proportion of 40%, 30%, 20% and 10% from the winner down. Kossa is one of the 4 eligible teams to compete, it won first position in the league championship. It says it has 9 of its players on the national team currently in Fiji for the Melanesian Cup competition. Kossa says if the knock-out competition is to commence tomorrow its chance to win will be adversely affected unfairly. It has asked for injunction to stop the commencement of the competition tomorrow.

Kossa's submission is that SIFF is acting unfairly because its Secretary, William Lai, had announced that the knock-out competition would not take place while the national team would be away for the Melanesian Cup competition. Then after the announcement, Naha Football Club complained and SIFF responded by going back on its announcement by scheduling the knock-out matches to commence tomorrow when the national team will still be away in Fiji.

SIFF's reply is that the knock-out competition is not a regular tournament, "it is a bonus," national players need not be there. The league championship which has 4 objectives, SIFF says, is the significant tournament, it has ended and Kossa has won it. Then SIFF says its Secretary, William Lai, made the statement complained about without authority; he is a supporter of Kossa. Further that SIFF was not influenced by Naha's complaint because SIFF did not receive the complaint in writing. The other consideration was that if the knock-out starts late, Honiara Super League competitions will not start early and not finish early, Honiara Super League will lose money because the stadium will undergo renovation soon, there will be no gate takings if the competitions are not held at the stadium.

The national team will return on 18.4.2000 which is 8 days away. I think if the knock-out is delayed, it will cause subsequent football competitions to delay by 8 days.

SIFF has authority and the right to decide its business as it wishes, but where other peoples' interests are concerned it has obligation to act fairly. It has to respect the legitimate expectations of those such as its member clubs or affiliates, who stand to gain by associating with SIFF. Also if SIFF hears one member it has to hear the opposing member in fairness. In this case I accept that Naha's complaint did not influence SIFF's decision and there was no need for SIFF to hear Kossa.

The worry I have is that SIFF's Secretary, William Lai, even if unauthorised, made a public press release that caused Kossa to rely on. Perhaps Kossa would have reconsidered its position about supplying up to 9 players to the national team had the statement not been made. Mr Lai was allowed to present himself as representing SIFF, I think SIFF should have retracted the statement early enough. Lai may be a supporter of Kossa, but he was SIFF's Secretary too. The important point is that he acted as agent of SIFF. Even if he had no authority, there was ostensible authority, and Mr Lai created, on behalf of SIFF, legitimate expectation in Kossa. How SIFF may deal with Mr Lai is not for this Court. The Club has overwhelming prospect of success, it is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the commencement tomorrow of the knock-out competition between the 4 top teams. I grant the injunction. The injunction to last until 16.4.2000.

The interlocutory injunction really takes effect as the final order. Considering that Kossa wants for its final relief just the postponement of the tournament, an interlocutory order granting or refusing injunction to restrain the commencement of the competition tomorrow wipes out the cause in the case all together.

What has happened in this case is that Kossa in fact applied for writ of certiorari to quash the decision of SIFF to commence the knock-out tournament tomorrow. Kossa had not obtained leave first as required under Order 61 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules. On its undertaking to file the application for leave and because on the facts I would have granted leave and further, because of the urgency of the matter, I condone the lack of procedure and grant the leave required. The order of Certiorari is issued and the decision of SIFF to have the knock-out competition commence tomorrow, Saturday 8^th April 2000 is quashed. SIFF may decide again, taking into account when the national team returns.

In view of the lack of application for leave first, I order no costs, so parties bear own costs.

Delivered this Friday the 7th day of April 2000 at 6:48 pm
At the High Court
Honiara

Sam Lungole-Awich
Judge