Teibi v Permanent Secretary, Department of Finance [2000] SBHC 15; HC-CC 062 of 2000 (20 April 2000)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Civil Case No. 062 of 2000

LAWRENCE TEIBI

-V-

THE PERMANENT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

High Court of Solomon Islands
(LUNGOLE-AWICH, J)

Hearing: 20 April 2000
Judgment: 20 April 2000

Judgment: Ex tempore

P Watts for the plaintiff
S Manetoali for the defendant

JUDGMENT

(LUNGOLE-AWICH, J): The plaintiff's case in the originating summons dated 28.2.2000 filed on 29.2.2000 is that the government of Solomon Islands espoused claims of the brother and sister of the plaintiff and got paid money in compensation by the Government of Papua New Guinea. The claim arose from the death of the brother and sister as the result of cross-border raid by agents of the Government of Papua New Guinea.

Learned counsel Mr Manetoali for the Attorney General, has moved to strike out the originating summons under Order 58 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules. His submission is that the process of originating summons is preserved for cases in which the question of construction of will, deed or statute are at issue.

Learned counsel Mr Watts for the plaintiff submitted that the application to strike out should have been for lack of reasonable cause of action under Order 27 rule 4 instead. It is not necessary in the application of Mr Manetoali, for the Court to consider O27 r4. Mr Manetoali has not challenged cause of action, he is only contesting the proper process to bring the plaintiff's case to Court.

Rules 1 and 2 of Order 58 which Mr Manetoali based his application on state:

"ORDER 58

DECLARATION ON ORIGINATING SUMMONS

1. Any person claiming to be interested under a deed, will, or other written instrument, may apply by originating summons for the determination of any question of construction arising under the instrument, and for a declaration of the rights of the persons interested.
   
2. Any person claiming any legal or equitable right in a case where the determination of the question whether he is entitled to the right depends upon a question of construction of any provision of a written law, may apply by originating summons for the determination of such question of construction, and for a declaration as to the right claimed."
   

I agree with the submission of Mr Manetoali that the plaintiff's case is not based on any written instrument or written law to be interpreted. The cases cited by Mr Manetoali are good guide. The plaintiff adopted the wrong process to commence his case, the originating summons is struck off with costs.

The plaintiff may, if he wishes, commence his case by the proper process.

Delivered this Thursday the 20^th day of April 2000.
At the High Court
Honiara

Sam Lungole-Awich
Judge