Rusa v Geruana Development Association [2006] SBHC 77; HCSI-CC 264 of 2006 (29 November 2006)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Civil Case No. 264 of 2006

DELFISHER RUSA AND HONA HEDI

V

GERUANA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, RICKY NAMUSU AND PACIFIC CREST ENTERPRISE LTD

(Brown, P.J)

Date of Hearing: 29th November 2006
Date of Ruling: 29th November 2006

Mr C Levo for the Defendant/Applicant
Mr Hou for the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs

RULING AND ORDERS

Brown, J: That summons for judgment is stood over to be heard with the hearing in the cause.

The applications for injunctions are both refused. Where the Forest Resources in lieu of Foreign and Resource Utilisation Act provisions appear to have been avoided by reliance upon private agreement there is no jurisdiction to grant interim injunctions to support the proper utilisation of the Act. Again no application relies upon the determination of the CLAC so as to support that Court Order affecting the right to log. There is then no right to injunctive relief in this High Court arising of the earlier Marovo Chiefs decision of 1976 when the Chiefs were clearly not faced with a logging argument.

This matter would seem to be one for determination by the Chiefs, failing which the Local Court may be approached.

When the parties argue over customary land boundaries yet presume to come to this Court seeking orders relating to logs felled, it is plain that argument is predominately one of customs going to the rights of the Association and landowner groups. Determination of their rights is a matter for the Chiefs.

There may well be an issue to be tried in the High Court but it does not appear from the pleadings. But the better way must be for the parties to attempt to attempt resolution amongst themselves.

Where the Court proceeds to hear the action and hears the various persons whose affidavits have been filed, there is a real risk that the Court will stop proceedings if it is satisfied on balance that the matter really relates to the powers of individuals in accordance with custom.

The time and cost expended in this High Court proceedings risk being wasted.

I direct that the counsel for the parties attempt mediation, failing settlements, either party may file a Certificate of Readiness at the expiration of 28 days.

Costs of today are reserved.

By the Court